I 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. R. 128 
To establish a demonstration incentive program within the Department of 
Education to promote installation of fire sprinkler systems, or other 
fire suppression or prevention technologies, in qualified student housing 
and dormitories, and for other purposes. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JANUARY 4, 2005 
Mrs. JONES of Ohio (for herself, Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania, Mr. 
MCHUGH, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. DICKS, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. JEFFERSON, Mr. 
GRIJALVA, Ms. LEE, Mr. GILLMOR, Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. WHITFIELD, Mr. 
LATOURETTE, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. PORTMAN, Mr. WEINER, Ms. KIL-
PATRICK of Michigan, Ms. KAPTUR, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Ms. 
MCCOLLUM of Minnesota, and Mr. ANDREWS) introduced the following 
bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Work-
force 
A BILL 
To establish a demonstration incentive program within the 
Department of Education to promote installation of fire 
sprinkler systems, or other fire suppression or prevention 
technologies, in qualified student housing and dor-
mitories, and for other purposes. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS. 
(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the 
‘‘College Fire Prevention Act’’. 
(b) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds the following: 
(1) On November 9, 2003, an early morning 
fire at the University of Connecticut destroyed a fra-
ternity. Five residents were in the building at the 
time of the fire. There were no working fire alarms 
in the building. 
(2) On September 26, 2003, a fraternity fire at 
the University of Wisconsin-Madison occurred in a 
secret room. The entrance to the room was made to 
look like a wall. Fire fighters were unable to locate 
the source of the fire despite an extensive search of 
the house. The fire was caused by a candle that ig-
nited some fabric and then spread to a chair. There 
were no fire sprinklers present. 
(3) On February 22, 2003, a fatal off-campus 
house fire at Allegheny College in Meadville, Penn-
sylvania, occurred in a 3-story, wood frame house 
that had been converted into apartments. There 
were single-station, battery-operated smoke detectors 
in the apartments. There were no sprinklers. The 
victim, Raymond Tricomi, was 21. 
(4) On January 1, 2003, a fire at Pennsylvania 
State University displaced 11 Penn State students
from their off-campus rooming house. Activated 
smoke detectors awakened 2 occupants who were 
able to escape the building. The other occupants 
were away for the holiday break. Fire loss was esti-
mated at $40,000 damage, and the cause of the fire 
is under investigation. The building was not 
equipped with an automatic fire sprinkler system. 
(5) On April 7, 2002, an early morning fire at 
DePauw University in Greencastle, Indiana, caused 
over $1,000,000 in damage. The fire, which started 
from an electrical appliance in a fourth floor room, 
forced the evacuation of 116 students from the 
building and more than 200 students from adjacent 
buildings.
The building was not equipped with an 
automatic fire sprinkler system. 
(6) On February 16, 2002, a halogen lamp at 
Amherst College in Amherst, Massachusetts, started 
a fire in a residence that had been converted into 
student housing. According to fire officials, the fire 
started in a second-floor room that was unoccupied 
at the time of the fire. A halogen lamp fell over and 
ignited combustibles in the area. The building’s fire 
alarm system was activated, and an occupant from 
another room discovered the fire. He unsuccessfully 
attempted to extinguish the fire using a dry chem-
ical fire extinguisher. Smoke and heat damage were 
limited to the room of origin.
Halogen lamps are 
banned by Amherst College. The building is 
unsprinklered, equipped with single-station smoke 
detectors in the individual rooms and a building fire 
alarm system. 
(7) On January 19, 2000, a fire occurred at a 
Seton Hall University dormitory. Three male fresh-
men, all 18 years of age, died. Fifty-four students, 
2 South Orange firefighters, and 2 South Orange 
police officers were injured. The dormitory was a 6- 
story, 350-room structure built in 1952, that housed 
approximately 600 students. It was equipped with 
smoke alarms but no fire sprinkler system. 
(8) On Mother’s Day in 1996 in Chapel Hill, 
North Carolina, a fire in the Phi Gamma Delta Fra-
ternity House killed 5 college juniors and injured 3. 
The 3-story plus basement fraternity house was 70 
years old. The National Fire Protection Association 
identified several factors that contributed to the 
tragic fire, including the lack of fire sprinkler pro-
tection. 
(9) It is estimated that between 1980 and 
1998, an average of 1,800 fires at dormitories, fra-
ternities, and sororities, involving 1 death, 70 inju-
ries, and $8,000,000 in property damage were re-
ported to public fire departments. 
(10) Within dormitories, fraternities, and so-
rorities the leading cause of fires is arson or sus-
pected arson. The second leading cause of college 
building fires is cooking. The third leading cause is 
smoking. 
(11) New dormitories are generally required to 
have advanced safety systems such as fire sprinklers. 
But such requirements are rarely imposed retro-
actively on existing buildings. 
(12) In 1998, 93 percent of the campus build-
ing fires reported to fire departments occurred in 
buildings where there were smoke alarms present. 
However, only 34 percent had fire sprinklers 
present. 
SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF FIRE SUPPRESSION DEM-
ONSTRATION INCENTIVE PROGRAM. 
(a) GRANTS.—The Secretary of Education (in this 
Act referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’), in consultation with 
the United States Fire Administration, shall establish a 
demonstration program to award grants on a competitive 
basis to eligible entities for the purpose of installing fire 
sprinkler systems, or other fire suppression or prevention
technologies, in student housing and dormitories owned or 
controlled by such entities. 
(b) ELIGIBLE ENTITY.—For purposes of this Act, the 
term ‘‘eligible entity’’ means any of the following: 
(1) An accredited public or private institution 
of higher education (as that term is defined in sec-
tion 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
U.S.C. 1001)). 
(2) An accredited historically Black college or 
university (as that term is used in section 322 of the 
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1061)). 
(3) An accredited Hispanic-serving institution 
(as that term is defined in section 502 of the Higher 
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1101a)). 
(4) An accredited tribally controlled college or 
university (as that term is defined in section 2 of the 
Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance 
Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 1801)). 
(5) A social fraternity or sorority exempt from 
taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal Rev-
enue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 501(a)), the active 
membership of which consists primarily of students 
in attendance at an accredited institution of higher 
education.
(c) SELECTION PRIORITY.—In making grants under 
subsection (a), the Secretary shall give priority to eligible 
entities that demonstrate the greatest financial need. 
(d) RESERVATIONS.—Of the amount made available 
to the Secretary for grants under this section for each fis-
cal year, the Secretary shall award— 
(1) not less than 10 percent to eligible entities 
that are historically Black colleges and universities, 
Hispanic-serving institutions, and tribally controlled 
colleges and universities; and 
(2) not less than 10 percent to eligible entities 
that are social fraternities and sororities. 
(e) APPLICATION.—To seek a grant under this sec-
tion, an eligible entity shall submit an application to the 
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and accompanied 
by such information as the Secretary may require. 
(f) MATCHING REQUIREMENT.—As a condition on re-
ceipt of a grant under subsection (a), the applicant shall 
provide (directly or through donations from public or pri-
vate entities) non-Federal matching funds in an amount 
equal to not less than 50 percent of the cost of the activi-
ties for which assistance is sought. 
(g) LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.— 
Not more than 10 percent of a grant made under sub-
section (a) may be expended for administrative expenses 
with respect to the grant. 
(h) REPORTS.—Not later than 12 months after the 
date of the first award of a grant under this section and 
annually thereafter until completion of the program, the 
Secretary shall provide to the Congress a report that in-
cludes the following: 
(1) The number and types of eligible entities re-
ceiving assistance under this section. 
(2) The amounts of such assistance, the 
amounts and sources of non-Federal funding lever-
aged for activities under grants under this section, 
and any other relevant financial information. 
(3) The number and types of student housing 
fitted with fire suppression or prevention tech-
nologies with assistance under this section, and the 
number of students protected by such technologies. 
(4) The types of fire suppression or prevention 
technologies installed with assistance under this sec-
tion, and the costs of such technologies. 
(5) Identification of Federal and State policies 
that present impediments to the development and in-
stallation of fire suppression or prevention tech-
nologies.
(6) Any other information determined by the 
Secretary to be useful to evaluating the overall effec-
tiveness of the program established under this sec-
tion in improving the fire safety of student housing. 
(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act 
$100,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 
2009. At the end of fiscal year 2009, all unobligated ap-
propriations authorized under this subsection shall revert 
to the general fund of the Treasury. 
SEC. 3. ADMISSIBILITY AS EVIDENCE. 
(a) PROHIBITION.—Notwithstanding any other provi-
sion of law and subject to subsection (b), any application 
for assistance under this Act, any negative determination 
on the part of the Secretary with respect to such applica-
tion, or any statement of reasons for the determination, 
shall not be admissible as evidence in any proceeding of 
any court, agency, board, or other entity. 
(b) EXCEPTION.—This section does not apply to the 
admission of an application, determination, or statement 
described in subsection (a) as evidence in a proceeding to 
enforce an agreement entered into between the Secretary 
and an eligible entity under section 2. 
Æ