The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
FA4610-11-R-0009 Attachment 6 30 CES/AT FACILITY DESIGN CHECKLIST Updated 12 Oct 2012
| DoD Minimum Antiterrorism Standards For Buildings (9 February 2012) |
| Compliance |
| Requirement |
| Reference |
| Yes |
| No |
| N/A |
References:
UFC 04-010-01, DoD Minimum Antiterrorism Standards for Buildings (9 February 2012)
| Mandatory DoD Minimum antiterrorism standards for new and existing inhabited buildings are contained in Appdx B. Additional recommended measures for new and existing inhabited buildings are included in Appdx C. The Mandatory DoD minimum antiterrorism standards for expeditionary and temporary structures have been purposely omitted from this checklist. Refer to UFC 04-010-01, Appendix D for information on those structures. |
| UFC 04-010-1, para 1.3 |
Levels of Protection – New and Existing Buildings
UFC 04-010-01,
Table 2-1
Standard 1. Standoff Distances
Controlled Perimeter
| 1 |
| Will the facility meet minimum standoff distances as indicated in Table B-1 below? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1 |
| 2 |
| If facility is new, are standoff distances less than those shown in the “Effective Standoff Distance” column in Table B-1? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1 |
| 3 |
| If the facility exists, has standoff distance been provided except in those areas where doing so is not possible? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1 |
| 4 |
| Have lesser standoff distances been allowed where the required level of protection can be shown to be achieved through analysis or can be achieved through building hardening or other mitigating construction or retrofit as described in the DoD Minimum AT Standards? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1 |
| 5 |
| Has the standoff distance been measured from the controlled perimeter to the closest point on the building exterior or inhabited portion of the Bldg? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.1 |
Parking and Roadways
| 6 |
| Have standoff distances for parking and roadways been based on the assumption that there is a controlled perimeter at which larger vehicle bombs will be detected and kept from entering the controlled perimeter? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2 |
| 7 |
| If there is a controlled perimeter, has standoff distances and explosive weight associated with parking and roadways in Table B-1 been applied? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2 |
| 8 |
| If there is no controlled perimeter, have standoff distances from parking and roadways been established according to the distances and explosive weight associated in Table B-1? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2 |
New Inhabited Buildings
| 9 |
| Is the minimum standoff for all new buildings, regardless of hardening or analysis, been established at 10 meters (33 feet) for both parking and roadways? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.1 |
Existing Inhabited Buildings
| 10 |
| Where possible, have parking and roadways been moved away from existing inhabited buildings IAW the standoff distances and explosive weights identified in Table B-1? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.2 |
Controlled Parking Areas
| 11 |
| If parking associated with existing inhabited buildings is allowed to be as close as 10 meters (33 feet) without hardening or analysis, has access control to the parking area been established at the applicable conventional construction standoff distance for parking identified in Table B-1? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.2.1 |
| 12 |
| In cases where the applicable level of protection can be provided (based on hardening or analysis) with a standoff distance between the conventional construction standoff distance and the effective standoff distance, has parking been allowed as close as 10 meters (33 feet) if parking is controlled at that lesser applicable standoff distance? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.2.1 |
Parking Within a Controlled Perimeter
| 13 |
| Has conventional construction or effective standoff distance at which access will be controlled been based on the standoff distances for parking and roadways within a controlled perimeter as identified in Table B-1 for the applicable building category? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.2.1.1 |
Parking Without a Controlled Perimeter
| 14 |
| Has conventional construction or effective standoff distance at which access will be controlled been based on the standoff distances for parking and roadways without a controlled perimeter as identified in Table B-1 for the applicable building category? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.2.1.2 |
Alternate Situations
| 15 |
| Will controlled parking be allowed to be closer to existing inhabited buildings where conditions necessitate it and where it can be shown through analysis that the required level of protection can be provided at a lesser standoff distance or if it can be provided through building hardening or other mitigating measures or retrofits? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.2.1.3 |
Parking on Existing Roadways
| 16 |
| Has parking along roadways been subjected to the same standoff considerations as other parking? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.2.2 |
| 17 |
| Has parking along roadways within the required standoff distances adjacent to existing buildings been allowed? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.2.2 |
Parking for Family Housing
| 18 |
| For existing family housing with 13 or more units per building within a controlled perimeter or where there is access control to the parking area, has parking within the required standoff distances been allowed where designated parking spaces are assigned for specific residents or residences? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.2.3 |
| 19 |
| Has assigned parking been labeled with names or ranks of the residents? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.2.3 |
| 20 |
| Do plans include encroaching on existing standoff when distances are less required? (For example, where existing designated parking is only 8 meters (27 feet) from existing family housing, that parking may be retained, but additional parking will not be allowed closer than 8 meters (27 feet) |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.2.2.3 |
Parking of Emergency, Command and Operations Support Vehicles
| 21 |
| Is there a need for emergency and command vehicles, as well as operations support vehicles, to be parked closer to inhabited buildings than allowed in Table B-1? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.3 |
| 22 |
| If there is a need for emergency and command vehicle parking close to inhabited buildings, is access to the vehicles controlled? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.3 |
| 23 |
| Ensure emergency and command vehicles will not be parked closer than the distance associated with unobstructed spaces as established in UFC –4-010-01, Standard 2 |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.3 |
Parking of Vehicles Undergoing Maintenance
| 24 |
| Is there a need to park vehicles undergoing maintenance inside buildings closer to inhabited areas of those same buildings? Permitted while they are undergoing repair where operationally necessary. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.4 |
Adjacent Existing Buildings
| 25 |
| During construction of new facilities adjacent to an existing facility, have parking areas, roadways, and trash containers been constructed IAW Table B-1 so that the standoff distances apply to all facilities? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.5 |
| 26 |
| When standoff distances are not available, has parking, roadways, and trash containers been allowed to encroach on existing standoff distances? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.5 |
Parking and Roadway Projects
| 27 |
| Where practical, do all roadway and parking area projects comply with the standoff distances from inhabited buildings in Table B-1? (Even applies where such projects are not associated with a building renovation, modification, repair, or restoration requiring compliance with standards.) |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.6 |
| 28 |
| When parking or roadways are within the standoff distances in Table B-1 from existing buildings are being constructed, expanded, or relocated, has those parking areas or roadways been allowed to encroach on existing standoff distances of inhabited buildings? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.6 |
Trash Containers
| 29 |
| Has standoff distances for trash containers been measured from the nearest point of the container or enclosure to the closest point on the building exterior or inhabited portion of the building? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.7 |
| 30 |
| When standoff distance is not available, have trash enclosures been hardened to mitigate the direct blast effects and secondary fragment effects of the explosive on the building? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.7 |
| 31 |
| If trash enclosures are located closer to the building, do unauthorized personnel secure the containers to preclude introduction of objects into the enclosures? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.7 |
| 32 |
| Do trash enclosures meet the intent of UFC 04-010-01, Standard 2, as long as they don’t violate the unobstructed space provisions? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.7 |
| 33 |
| Are openings in screening materials and gaps between the ground and screens or walls making up the trash enclosure greater than 150mm (6 inches)? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.1.7 |
Standard 2. Unobstructed Space
| 34 |
| Do exterior facility obstructions within 10 meters (33 feet) of inhabited buildings or portions thereof allow for concealment from observation of explosive devices 150 mm (6-inches) or greater in height? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.2 |
| 35 |
| Although site furnishings and plantings around buildings are permitted, are they situated in such a way that any explosive devices placed in that space are observable by building occupants? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.2 |
Electrical and Mechanical Equipment
| 36 |
| Is the preferred location of electrical and mechanical equipment such as transformers, air-cooled condensers, and packaged chillers outside of the unobstructed space or on the roof? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.2.1 |
| 37 |
| If the equipment cannot be placed outside of the unobstructed space or on the roof, is it constructed in such a way that the equipment provides no opportunity for concealment of explosive devices? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.2.1 |
Equipment Enclosures
| 38 |
| If walls or other screening devices with more than two sides are placed around electrical or mechanical equipment with the unobstructed space, is the equipment enclosed on all four sides and the top? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.2.2 |
| 39 |
| Are openings in screening materials and gaps between the ground and screens or walls making the equipment enclosure greater than 150mm (6 inches)? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.2.2 |
| 40 |
| Can the equipment enclosure be secured so that unauthorized personnel cannot gain access? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.2.2 |
Standard 3. Drive-Up/Drop-Off Areas
| 41 |
| Does the facility require access to areas within the required standoff distance for dropping off or picking up people or loading or unloading packages and other objects? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.3 |
Marking
| 42 |
| Where operational or safety considerations require drive-up or drop-off areas or drive-through lanes near buildings, have those areas or lanes been clearly defined and marked so that their intended use is clear to prevent parking of vehicles in those areas? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.3.1 |
Unattended Vehicles
| 43 |
| Are unattended vehicles allowed in drive-up or drop-off areas or drive-through lanes? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.3.2 |
| 44 |
| What actions will be taken to prevent vehicles from being left unattended in drive-up or drop-off areas or drive-through lanes? |
Location
| 45 |
| Will drive-through lanes or drive-up/drop-off areas be located under any inhabited portion of a building? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.3.3 |
Standard 4. Access Roads
| 46 |
| Where access roads are necessary for the operation of the building (including those required for fire department access), will access control measures be implemented to prohibit unauthorized vehicles from using access roads within the applicable standoff distances? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.4 |
Standard 5. Parking Beneath Buildings or on Rooftops
| 47 |
| Has parking beneath inhabited buildings or on rooftops of inhabited buildings been eliminated? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.5 |
| 48 |
| Does limited real estate make such parking unavoidable? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.5 |
| 49 |
| When such parking is unavoidable, have the following measures been incorporated into the design of new buildings or mitigating measures into existing buildings to achieve an equivalent level of protection? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.5 |
Access Control
| 50 |
| Will access control measures be implemented to prohibit unauthorized personnel and vehicles from entering parking areas? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.5.1 |
Structural Elements
| 51 |
| Will/Have the floors beneath or roofs above inhabited areas and all other adjacent supporting structural elements been constructed so they will not fail from the detonation in the parking area of an explosive equivalent to explosive weight II in Table B-1? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.5.2 |
| 52 |
| Unless it can be shown that a greater standoff distance can be justified, are structural elements in parking areas evaluated at a standoff distance of 4 feet (1.2 m)? (Failure will be evaluated based on the applicable level of protection in accordance with PDC Technical Report 06-08.) |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.5.2 |
| 53 |
| Are there no venting into inhabited areas of buildings that could result in occupant injuries? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-1.5.2 |
B-2. STRUCTURAL DESIGN
Standard 6. Progressive Collapse Resistance
| info |
| Progressive collapse is considered to be significant risk for buildings of three or more stories. Basements and penthouses will be considered stories if there is any space that is designed for human occupancy and that is equipped with means of egress as well as light and ventilation facilities that meet the local building code requirements as detailed in UFC 4-023-03. For all new and existing DoD buildings of three stories or more required to comply with these standards, regardless of the standoff distance provided, follow the requirements in UFC 4-023-03 Design of Buildings to Resist Progressive Collapse. Design the superstructures to sustain local damage with the structural systems remaining stable without being damaged to extents disproportionate to the original local damage. |
| UFC 04-010-01 |
Para B-2.1.
Progressive Collapse Avoidance Design Requirements
| Info |
| Follow the design guidance in UFC 4-023-03 for new and existing DoD Buildings to reduce the potential for progressive collapse due to localized structural damage due to unforeseeable events. For inhabited buildings, primary gathering buildings, billeting, and high occupancy family housing, apply the requirements for occupancy category II or higher. UFC 3-301-01 defines occupancy categories for numbers of occupants and different types of occupancies. The design requirements in UFC 4-023-03 are related to those occupancy categories. When DoD personnel meet the partial occupancy criteria in paragraph 1-8.4.1, the progressive collapse requirements of UFC 4-023-03 are applicable to the entire structure, not just the portion of the building occupied by DoD personnel. |
| UFC 04-010-01 |
Para B-2.1.1
Uncontrolled Public Access
| Info |
| UFC 4-023-03 requires interior columns and/or walls to be evaluated for progressive collapse where there is underground parking or other uncontrolled public access. For the purposes of this standard and for applying the provisions of UFC 4-023-03, access control at controlled perimeters will not normally be considered to establish sufficient positive access controls for buildings within those perimeters to be considered to have controlled public access. For the purposes of this standard, positive access control will be considered to include (but not be limited to) electronic access control on all exterior doors. Where visitor processing makes locking visitor entrances during building operating hours impractical, providing personnel to control visitor access can be considered positive control at those entrances. Controlled public access to individual buildings or groups of buildings should be coordinated with local physical security policies and procedures. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.1.2 |
Standard 7. Structural Isolation
Building Additions
| 54 |
| Have all additions to existing buildings been designed to be structurally independent from the adjacent existing building? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.2.1 |
| 55 |
| As an alternative, has the collapse of either the additions or the existing building been verified through analysis so that it won’t result in the collapse of the remainder of the building? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.2.1 |
| 56 |
| If there are areas of the building that do not meet the criteria for inhabited buildings (i.e. storage warehouses, vehicle bays, etc), is the design of the superstructures of those areas structurally independent from the inhabited area? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.2.2 |
| 57 |
| As an alternative, has the collapse of low occupancy portions of the building been verified through analysis so that it won’t result in the collapse of any portion of the building covered by this standard or has the low occupancy portion of the building been designed to meet the requirements for an inhabited building IAW the standards? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.2.2 |
| 58 |
| Although not mandatory for existing structures, has the requirement been implemented where possible? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.2.2 |
Standard 8. Building Overhangs
| 59 |
| Will the building have overhangs with inhabited spaces above them where people could gain access to the area underneath the overhang? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.3 |
| 60 |
| When such overhangs must be used, have measures in this paragraph been incorporated into the design for new buildings or mitigating measures been incorporated for existing buildings to achieve an equivalent level of protection? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.3 |
Parking and Roadway Restrictions
| 61 |
| Will there be roadways or parking areas under the overhangs? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.3.1 |
| 62 |
| For existing buildings, are roadways that cannot be abandoned or relocated controlled to ensure vehicles do not park under the overhang? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.3.1 |
Floors
| 63 |
| Have the floors beneath the inhabited areas been constructed so they will not fail from detonation underneath the overhang? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.3.2 |
Superstructure
| 64 |
| Has the progressive collapse provisions of Standard 6 been included for all structural elements within and adjacent to the overhang? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.3.3 |
Adjacent Building Elements
| 65 |
| Do all building elements adjacent to the overhang area provide the appropriate level of protection to explosive weights I and II in Table B-1? |
Standard 9. Exterior Masonry Walls
| 66 |
| Will the new facility have Unreinforced masonry walls on the exterior walls? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B- |
| 67 |
| Do all external masonry walls have a minimum of 0.05 percent vertical reinforcement ratio, with a maximum spacing of 1200mm (48-inches)? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.4 |
| 68 |
| Do all external masonry walls have a minimum of 0.025 percent horizontal reinforcement ratio, consisting of either a joint reinforcement spaced no more than 410 mm (1.3 ft), or a bond beam reinforcement spaced no more than 1200mm (4 ft), with reinforcement within 410mm (1.3 ft) of the top and bottom of the wall? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.4 |
| 69 |
| For existing buildings, have mitigating measures been implemented to provide an equivalent level of protection? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-2.4 |
Standard 10. Windows and Skylights
| 70 |
| To minimize the hazards from flying glass fragments, have the provisions for glazing, framing, connectons, and supporting structural elements been implemented IAW UFC 04-010-01 for all new and existing buildings? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1 |
| 71 |
| Are the provisions applied at all standoff distances, even those that meet or exceed the wall conventional construction standoff distances? Mandatory |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1 |
Dynamic Analysis & Testing
| 72 |
| Do windows and skylights fabricated using laminated glass glazing meet analysis, testing, or design approach requirements IAW UFC 4-010-01, paras B-3.1.1, B-3.1.2, and B-3.1.3? |
| UFC 04-010-01, paras B-3.1.1, B-3.1.2 and B-3.1.3 |
Glazing
| 73 |
| Has a laminted glass of minimum of 0.75-mm (.030-inch) interlayer thickness and a load resistance determined from ASTM E 1300 greater or equal to the 3-second duration equivalent design load determined from ASTM F 2248 for all exterior windows, skylights, and glazed doors been used? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.3.1 |
Frames
| 74 |
| Are window and skylight frames, mullions and sashes of aluminum or steel designed in accordance with ASTM F 2248? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.3.2 |
| 75 |
| Are window frames constructed from materials other than aluminum or steel tested in accordance with paragraph B-3.1.2 or proven by analysis to demonstrate performance equivalent to or better than the hazard rating associated with the applicable level of protection as indicated in Table 2-1? |
| UFC 04-010-01, |
para B-3.1.3.2
Glazing Frame Bite
| 76 |
| Have the glazing frame bite requirements for structurally and non-structurally glazed window or skylights been met IAW ASTM F 2248? |
| UFC 04-010-01, |
para B-3.1.3.3
| 77 |
| For single pane glazing, has the structural silicone bead been applied to both sides of the glass panel? |
| UFC 04-010-01, |
| 78 |
| For insulating glass units, has the structural silicone bead been applied to the inboard side of the glass panel? |
| UFC 04-010-01, |
Connection Design
| 79 |
| Has the connection design load been determined IAW ASTM F 2248? |
| UFC 04-010-01, |
para B-3.1.3.4
Static Design of Supporting Structural Elements
| 80 |
| For building elements that have only glazing framed into them, such as curtain walls and storefronts, are they designed as frame members in accordance with paragraph B-3.1.3.2? |
| UFC 04-010-01, |
para B-3.1.4
Wall and Roof Elements
| 81 |
| For window and skylight systems in buildings situated at or beyond the wall conventional construction standoff distance for the wall material to which it is attached, are the surrounding wall and roof elements and their connections to the rest of the structure designed as described in para B-3.1.4.1? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.4.1 |
| 82 |
| For window and skylight systems in buildings situated at less than the wall conventional construction standoff distance, are the surrounding wall and roof elements designed dynamically in accordance with paragraph B-3.1.1? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.4.1 |
Reactions
| Info |
| The reactions from the supporting structural element analysis normally do not have to be carried through the horizontal and lateral bracing systems of buildings to the foundations. The main concern is that these loads are transferred into horizontal floor and roof systems without failing those connections or the attached elements, as the building mass dissipates those loads before they are transferred to the foundation. It is left to the structural engineer to assess the adequacy of these connections, the attaching elements, and the need for further analysis. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.4.2 |
Skylights
| 83 |
| To reduce glazing fragment hazards when glazing falls from the elevations of skylights, is skylight glazing designed as a minimum to break, but remain in the frame, which is equivalent to the minimal hazard rating in ASTM F 1642 (medium level of protection in Table 2-1) and the appropriate blast load for the applicable angle of incidence to design or test the skylight used? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.5 |
| 84 |
| Window and Skylight Replacement Projects |
| 85 |
| Whenever window and skylight glazing is being replaced as part of a planned window or glazing replacement project in existing buildings that meet the occupancy provisions of these standards, are glazing, frames, connections, and supporting structural elements whether or not the building meets the triggers in paragraph 1-8.2, designed to meet all of the requirements of this standard? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.6 |
| 86 |
| Are window and skylight designs based on either the standoff distances to existing parking and roadways or to the planned locations for future parking and roadways in accordance with the installation or facility master plan? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.6 |
| 87 |
| Is no less than 1/4-inch (6-mm) nominal polycarbonate or laminated glass for exterior windows or skylights provided? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.6 |
| 88 |
| For laminated glass is a glazing frame bite provided in accordance with ASTM F 2248? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.6 |
| 89 |
| For polycarbonate is a glazing frame bite of no less than 1.5 times the polycarbonate thickness provided? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.6 |
Buildings Partially Exempt from Standard 1
| Info |
| Where buildings are exempt from parking and roadway standoff distance provisions of Standard 1 in accordance with Chapter 1, provide windows and skylights can be constructed as described in paragraph B-3.1.7. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.7 |
Alternative Window Treatments
| 90 |
| Are window retrofit products that rely on fragment retention film, fragment retention film as part of a retrofit system, or blast curtain or blind systems generally have higher life cycle costs than laminated glass windows due to their shorter design lives and due to operation and maintenance issues governed by the following paragraphs B-3.1.8.1 to 3.1.8.3? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.8 |
New Buildings and Existing Buildings Undergoing Major Renovations or Window Replacement Projects
| 91 |
| Are window retrofits for a new or existing building complying with these standards, except for leased buildings as stated below? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.8.1 |
Leased Buildings
| Info |
| For leased buildings that are required to comply with these standards, windows using laminated glass are preferred, but window retrofits incorporating alternative window treatments may be allowed if they provide the appropriate level of protection as indicated in Table 2-1as long as the lease agreement stipulates that they will be maintained and replaced in accordance with manufacturers’ recommendations. This will include meeting the requirements for supporting structural elements. Compliance with the required level of protection may be demonstrated through analysis or through testing. Testing will be performed in accordance with ASTM F 1642. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.8.2 |
Other Existing Buildings
| Info |
| For existing buildings that are not required to comply with these standards, window retrofits incorporating alternative window treatments are viable and economical solutions to mitigating the effects of explosive attacks, but will be evaluated prior to installation so that reduction in glass hazards may be validated. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.8.3 |
Exterior Stairwells and Covered or Enclosed Walkways
| Info |
| Glazing in stairwells and covered or enclosed walkways that are exterior to buildings required to comply with these standards is not required to comply with the provisions of this standard because exterior stairwells and walkways generally are not considered to be routinely occupied. Building components behind the exterior stairwell glazing must be capable of mitigating any hazards resulting from the stairwell or enclosed walkway glazing failure in response to a blast event in accordance with the applicable levels of protection described in Table 2-1. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.1.9 |
Standard 11. Building Entrance Layout
| Info |
| Where the main entrances to buildings face installation perimeters, people entering and exiting the buildings are vulnerable to being fired upon from vantage points outside the installations. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.2 |
New Buildings
| 92 |
| During the phase design for new inhabited buildings, does the main entrance to the building face the installation perimeter or other uncontrolled vantage points with direct lines of sight to the entrance? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.2.1 |
| 93 |
| If the new facility must face the installation perimeter, do plans include a means to block the line of sight? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.2.1 |
Existing Buildings
| 94 |
| Are there existing inhabited buildings in use that have an unobstructed view of the installation perimeter? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.2.2 |
| 95 |
| If existing inhabited buildings face the installation perimeter, do personnel use a different entrance as the main entrance or screen that entrance to limit the ability of potential aggressors to target people entering or leaving the building? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.2.2 |
Entries with Multiple Sight Lines
| 96 |
| Are main building entrances with sightlines from multiple vantage points at or outside of controlled perimeters, where there are no controlled perimeters, or where it is otherwise infeasible to avoid both entrances facing those vantage points? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.2.3 |
| 97 |
| If there are main building entrances with sightlines from multiple vantage points at or outside of controlled perimeters, where there are no controlled perimeters, or where it is otherwise infeasible to avoid both entrances facing those vantage points, is screening or other means to block line of sight provided? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.2.3 |
Standard 12. Exterior Doors
| 98 |
| For existing and new buildings covered by UFC 04-010-01, is the design of all exterior doors based on standoff from the controlled perimeters in addition to guidance in Table B-1 for applicable explosive weights? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.3 |
Unglazed Doors
| 99 |
| Are unglazed doors provided that are tested to achieve the applicable performance in Table 2-1 in accordance with ASTM F 2247 or that meet the provisions of the alternative designs paragraph B-3.3.3? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.3.1 |
Glazed Doors
| 100 |
| Do glazed doors meet the same glazing and frame bite provisions of Standard 10? Mandatory |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.3.2 |
Alternative Designs
| 101 |
| Are doors positioned such that they will not be propelled into rooms if they fail in response to a blast? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.3.3 |
| 102 |
| Have other means been taken to ensure doors do not become hazards to buildings occupants such as ensuring they are intercepted by a surface with sufficient strength to keep the doors from translating into inhabited areas if they fail or design the doors to remain in the door frames if not possible to design surfaces to safely intercept the door? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.3.3 |
Vestibules or Foyers
| Info |
| In vestibules, foyers, or similar entry configurations into inhabited areas where there are inner and outer doors the vestibules, foyers, or similar entries are considered not to be routinely occupied spaces. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.3.4 |
| 103 |
| Do inner doors in vestibules or foyers meet the provisions of these standards |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.3.4 |
| 104 |
| Do any other glazing associated with inner door entries such as sidelights and transoms meet the requirements of Standard 10? The inner doors and glazing must be capable of mitigating any hazards resulting from the enclosed vestibule or foyer outer doors and glazing failure in response to the design blast event. This is to account for the fact that at the levels of protection required in these standards the outer doors and glazing may fail, which would subject the inner doors and glazing to significant blast loads. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.3.4 |
Inhabited Buildings Partially Exempt from Standard 1
| Info |
| Where buildings are exempt from parking and roadway standoff distance provisions of Standard 1 in accordance with Chapter 1, provide doors that open outwards. Where glazed doors are provided follow the glazing and frame bite provisions in paragraph B-3.1.7. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.3.5 |
Overhead Doors
| 105 |
| Do conventional overhead doors meet the required performance in Table 2-1, and do not open into inhabited spaces or that if they fail that they are intercepted by walls that are designed with sufficient strength to keep the overhead doors from translating into inhabited areas? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.3.6 |
Standard 13. Mailrooms
Location
| 106 |
| If a new or existing building covered by this UFC must have a mailroom, is the mailroom located on the perimeter of the building? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.4.1 |
| 107 |
| If the mailroom is located in the interior of buildings, have retrofit options been incorporated to mitigate the mail bomb threat? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.4.1 |
Proximity
| 108 |
| Are mailrooms located as far from heavily populated areas of the building and critical infrastructures as possible? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.4.2 |
| 109 |
| If the mailroom isn’t retrofitted, is it located in a spot that it will minimize injuries and damage to adjacent resources if a mail bomb detonates? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.4.2 |
Standard 14. Roof Access
| 110 |
| For new and existing inhabited buildings, has access to roofs been controlled to minimize the possibility of aggressors placing explosives or chemical, biological, or radiological agents or otherwise threatening building occupants or critical infrastructure? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.5 |
New Buildings
| 111 |
| Do designs for new buildings eliminate all external roof access by providing access from internal stairways or ladders, such as in mechanical rooms? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.5.1 |
Existing Buildings
| 112 |
| If it isn’t possible to eliminate external access on existing buildings, have external ladders or stairways been secured with locked cages or similar mechanisms? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.5.2 |
Standard 15. Overhead Mounted Architectural Features
| 113 |
| For all new and existing buildings covered by UFC 04-010-01, have overhead mounted features weighing 14 kilograms (31 lbs) or more been mounted to minimize the likelihood that they will fall and injure building occupants? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.6 |
| 114 |
| If overhead mounted features exist, have they been mounted so they resist forces of 0.5 times the component weight in any direction and 1.5 times the component weight in the downward direction? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-3.6 |
B-4. ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL DESIGN
Standard 16. Air Intakes
| Info |
| Air intakes to heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems, designed to move air throughout a building, that are at ground level provide an opportunity for aggressors to easily place contaminants that could be drawn into the building. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.1 |
New Buildings
| 115 |
| For all new buildings covered by UFC 04-010-01, are the air intakes located at least 3 meters (10 feet) above the ground? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.1.1 |
Existing Buildings
| 116 |
| Although not mandatory, are air intakes located at least 3 meters (10 feet) above the ground? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.1.2 |
Interior Walls in Equipment Rooms
| 117 |
| Do air intakes that are designed to cool equipment allow blast pressures to infiltrate equipment rooms? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.1.3 |
| 118 |
| Where air intakes that are designed to cool equipment allow blast pressures to infiltrate equipment rooms, are equipment room interior walls designed to the same standards for blast resistance as the exterior walls of buildings based on the standoff distance provided and allowing for blast pressure reductions where they can be validated? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.1.3 |
Standard 17. Mailroom Ventilation
| Info |
| To ensure airborne chemical, biological, and radiological agents introduced into mailrooms do not migrate into other areas of buildings in which mailrooms are located, provide separate, dedicated air ventilation systems for mailrooms. |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.2 |
Other Heating and Cooling Systems
| 119 |
| Is the airflow system for mailrooms and other areas of the buildings in which they are located kept separate if heating and cooling systems such as steam, hot water, chilled water, and refrigerant are used throughout? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.2.1 |
Dedicated Exhaust Systems
| 120 |
| If a dedicated exhaust system is included within a mailroom, does it maintain slight negative air pressure (minimum of 0.05 inches of water [12.4Pa]) with respect to the remainder of the building so that the flow of air is into and contained in the mailroom? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.2.2 |
Outside Intakes and Exhausts
| 121 |
| Are mailroom ventilation systems outside air intakes and exhausts equipped with low leakage isolation dampers that can be automatically closed to isolate the mailrooms and do the dampers have maximum leakage rates of 3 cfm/square foot (15 liters/second/square meter) with a differential pressure of one inch of water gage (250 Pa) across the damper.? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.2.3 |
Isolation Controls
| 122 |
| Have separate switches or methods of control to isolate mailrooms in the event of a suspected or actual chemical, biological, or radiological release been installed? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.2.4 |
Standard 18. Emergency Air Distribution Shutoff
| 123 |
| For all new and existing inhabited buildings, has an emergency shutoff switch in the HVAC control system that can immediately shut down air distribution throughout the building except where interior pressure and airflow control would more efficiently prevent the spread of airborne contaminants and/or ensure the safety of egress pathways been installed? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.3 |
| 124 |
| Has the emergency shutoff switch (or switches) been located in a position to be easily accessible by building occupants? (Locate the shutoff switch [or switches] to be easily accessible by locating them similarly to manual fire alarm boxes in accordance with NFPA 72 and with at least one shutoff switch per floor and so that the travel distance to the nearest shutoff switch will not be in excess of 200 feet [61 meters]. Ensure that the shutoff switches are well labeled and of a different color than fire alarm pull stations.) |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.3 |
Outside Air Intakes and Exhausts
| 125 |
| Have low leakage dampers, that automatically close when the emergency air distribution shutoff switch is activated, been provided for all outside air intakes, relief air, and exhaust openings? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.3.1 |
| 126 |
| Do all of the low leakage dampers have maximum leakage rates of 3 cfm/square foot (15 liters/second/square meter) with a differential pressure of one inch of water gage (250 Pa) across the damper? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.3.1 |
| Info |
| If shutting down an exhaust system will violate building or fire codes or create an unsafe condition, then the exhaust system |
may continue to operate. For example, the installation of dampers in kitchen exhaust ductwork, where the dampers can become laden with grease, may be a violation of fire codes. Also, kitchen hood exhaust fans may have to continue to operate to avoid potential fire hazards.
UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.3.1
Standard 19. Utility Distribution and Installation
Utility Routing
| 127 |
| Has critical or fragile utilities been routed in all new inhabited buildings so that they are not on exterior walls or on walls shared with mailrooms? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.4 |
| 128 |
| Although not mandatory, have critical or fragile utilities been routed in existing buildings so that they are not on exterior walls or on walls shared with mailrooms? Recommended |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.4 |
| 129 |
| When redundant utilities are required IAW other requirements or criteria, are the redundant utilities collocated with or run within the same chassis? Prohibited |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.4.2 |
Emergency Backup Systems
| 130 |
| When emergency backup systems are required IAW other requirements or criteria, are they located away from the system components for which they provide backup? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.4.3 |
Standard 19. Equipment Bracing
| 131 |
| Have all overhead utilities and other fixtures weighing 14 kilograms (31 lbs) or more been mounted with rigid or flexible systems to minimize the likelihood that they would fall and injure building occupants? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.4 |
| 132 |
| Have all equipment mountings been designed to resist forces of 0.5 times the equipment weight in any direction and 1.5 times the equipment weight in the downward direction? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.4 |
Standard 20. Under Building Access
| 133 |
| Are accesses to crawl spaces, utility tunnels, and other means of under building access controlled to prevent aggressors’ opportunities to place explosives beneath buildings? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.5 |
Standard 21. Mass Notification
| 134 |
| Do all inhabited buildings have a way to timely notify occupants to threats and instruct them what to do in response to those threats? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.6 |
New Buildings
| 135 |
| Will the new inhabited building have the capability to provide real-time information to building occupants or personnel in the immediate vicinity of the building during emergency situations? Required |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.6.1 |
| 136 |
| Does the system include the capability to relay information specific enough to determine the appropriate response actions? |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.6.1 |
Existing Buildings
| 137 |
| Are existing primary gathering facilities, billeting, and high occupancy family housing equipped with mass notification systems? Mandatory |
| UFC 04-010-01, para B-4.6.2 |
OFFICE:
NAME:
DATE:
PROJECT/BUILDING:
| Site Planning: The following additional measures, if implemented, will significantly enhance site security with little increase in cost and should be considered for all new and existing inhabited buildings |
| UFC 04-010-01, Appdx C-1 |
| Recommendation 1. Vehicle Access Points |
| C-1.1 |
| Is the number of points of access kept to the minimum necessary for operational or life safety purposes? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.1 |
Recommendation 2. High-Speed Vehicle Approaches
| To facilitate reductions in vehicle speed, is there any unobstructed vehicle approach perpendicular to inhabited buildings at the required parking and roadway standoff distances? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.2 |
Recommendation 3. Vantage Points
| Have vantage points on the exterior of the installation that would be beneficial to terrorists targeting buildings on the base been identified? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.3 |
| Are there means in place that would eliminate the vantage points or lessen the building’s exposure? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1 |
Recommendation 4. Drive-Up/Drop Off
| Are drive-up/drop off areas located away from large glazed areas of the building to minimize the potential for hazardous flying glass fragments in the event of an explosion? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.4 |
Recommendation 5. Building Location
| Have separation distances between inhabited buildings and areas with large visitor populations been maximized? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.5 |
Recommendation 6. Railroad Location
| Will / Are there inhabited buildings located close to railroads? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.6 |
| Where railroads are in the vicinity of existing buildings, have standoff distances been incorporated between the railroad and any inhabited buildings IAW explosive weights identified in Table B-1? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.6 |
| If standoff between inhabited buildings and railroads cannot be achieved due to exorbitant costs, are there procedures in place to prohibit trains from stopping in the vicinity? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.6 |
Recommendation 7. Access Control for Family Housing
| For new family housing areas, has space been provided for controlling access at the perimeter so that a controlled perimeter can be established if the need arises in the future? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.7 |
Recommendation 8. Standoff for Family Housing
| For new family housing areas, have standoff distances IAW the controlled perimeter standoff distance in Table B-1 from installation perimeters and roads, streets, or highways external to housing areas been maintained? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.8 |
Recommendation 9. Building Separation
| This recommendation applies to new buildings and is established to minimize the possibility that an attack on one building causes injuries or fatalities in adjacent buildings. The separation distance is predicated on the potential use of indirect fire weapons. |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.9 |
Billeting and Primary Gathering Buildings
| For all new billeting and primary gathering buildings, are adjacent inhabited buildings separated from the billeting and primary gathering building by at least 10 meters? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.9.1 |
| Where it is necessary to encroach on those building separations, has the billeting and primary gathering building been analyzed and provided hardened building components as necessary to mitigate the effects of indirect fire weapons equivalent to those identified as explosive weight III in Table D-1 to the low level of protection? (Levels of protection are described in Table 2-1 and in UFC 4-020-01. The indirect fire weapon should be assumed to detonate at a distance from the target building of one-half of the separation distance.) |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.9.1 |
Other Inhabited Buildings
| Info |
| There is no minimum separation distances required for antiterrorism purposes for inhabited buildings other than billeting and primary gathering facilities. |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-1.9.2 |
| Structural and Architectural Design: The following additional measures, if implemented, will significantly enhance building occupants’ safety and security with little increase in cost. Consider these measures for all new and existing buildings required to comply with these standards. |
| UFC 04-010-01, Appdx C-2 |
Recommendation 11. Internal Circulation
| Will circulation within the building be designed in such a way to provide visual detection and monitoring of unauthorized personnel approaching controlled areas or occupied spaces (e.g. funds windows, vaults, control centers, classified storage areas, etc.)? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-2.1 |
Recommendation 12. Visitor Control
| Will visitor access be controlled to maximize the possibility of detecting potential threatening activities? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-2.2 |
| In buildings with controlled visitor access, is the access kept away from sensitive or critical areas, areas where high-risk or mission-critical personnel are located, or other areas with large population densities of DoD personnel? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-2.2 |
Recommendation 13. Asset Location
| To minimize exposure to direct blast effects and potential impacts from hazardous glass fragments and other potential debris, will critical assets and mission-critical or high-risk personnel be located away from the building exterior? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-2.3 |
Recommendation 14. Room Layout
| In rooms adjacent to the exterior of the building, will personnel and critical equipment be positioned to minimize exposure to direct blast effects and potential impacts from hazardous glass fragments and other potential debris? |
| UFC 04-010-01, Apdx C-2.4 |
Recommendation 15. External Hallways
| Doors can become hazardous debris during explosive blast events and doors designed to resist blast effects are expensive. Will the building be constructed so that external hallway configurations for inhabited buildings are eliminated? |
| UFC 04-010-01, |
Appdx C-2.5
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
image1.png image2.png