National Fire Protection Association
1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471
Phone: 617-770-3000 • Fax: 617-770-0700 • www.nfpa.org
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Technical Committee on Emergency Communications Systems
FROM:
Kim Shea
DATE:
January 31, 2011
SUBJECT:
NFPA 72 (SIG-ECS) ROP TC Letter Ballot (A2012)
____________________________________________________________
The ROP letter ballot for SIG-ECS is attached. The ballot is for formally voting on
whether or not you concur with the committee’s actions on the proposals. Reasons must
accompany all negative and abstention ballots.
Please do not vote negatively because of editorial errors. However, please bring
such errors to my attention for action.
Please complete and return your ballot as soon as possible but no later than Thursday,
February 10, 2011. As noted on the ballot form, please return ballot via e-mail to
ecs@nfpa.org or via fax to 617-984-7070. You may also mail your ballot to the
attention of Kim Shea at NFPA, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169.
The return of ballots is required by the Regulations Governing Committee Projects.
Attachments: Proposals
Letter Ballot
ROP TC Initial Ballot Cover Memo – September 24, 2010
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-1 Log #CP1 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Review entire document to: 1) Update any extracted material by preparing separate proposals to
do so, and 2) review and update references to other organizations documents, by preparing proposal(s) as required.
To conform to the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-11 Log #20b SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
John F. Bender, Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
Update the references to the following ANSI Publications:
ANSI/UL 217,
, 2006, revised 2008 2010. (SIG-HOU)
ANSI/UL 268,
, 2006 2009. (SIG-HOU)
ANSI/UL 864,
, 2003, revised 2006 2010.
(SIG-ECS, SIG-HOU)
ANSI/UL 985,
, 2000, revised 2003 2008. (SIG-HOU)
ANSI/UL 2017,
, 2000 2008, revised 2004 2009.
(SIG-ECS)
Update referenced standards to the most recent revisions and add ANSI approval designation to
ANSI/UL 2017. The revisions to UL 217 include clarification of Smoldering Smoke Test wood stick amount and
orientation new surge tests, a reference to NFPA 302 in Scope and addition of lower beam limits for flammable liquid
fuel fire. UL 268 is the first publication of the common UL and ULC standard for Smoke Detectors for Fire Alarm
Systems. National differences are identified in the new standard. UL 864 has been revised to include Fail-Safe Fire
Release Devices. UL 985 reflects the recent reaffirmation as an American National Standard. The revisions of ANSI/UL
2017 are to address universal upkeep of UL Standards for Safety. These revisions are considered to be
non-substantive.
Printed on 1/28/2011
1
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-22 Log #498 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Andrew G. Berezowski, Honeywell Inc.
Add new text to read as follows:
The state of an environment, fire alarm, or signaling or system
A situation, environmental state, or equipment state that warrants some type of signal, notification, communication,
response, action or service.
An environment that poses an immediate threat to life, property, or mission.
A potential threat to life or property may be present and time is available for investigation.
The complete failure of a protection system (e.g. fire system inoperable, ECS inoperable, sprinkler system inoperable,
etc.), or an event causing the activation of a supervisory initiating device used to monitor an environmental element,
system element, component, or function, whose failure poses a high risk to life, property or mission (e.g. sprinkler valve
closed, water tank low water level, low building temperature, etc.), or the absence of a guard’s tour supervisory signal
within prescribed timing requirements, or the presence of a guards’ tour supervisory signal outside of prescribed
sequencing requirements, or the presence of a delinquency signal.
High risk elements, components, and functions should be identified using risk analysis.
A fault in a portion of a system monitored for integrity that does not render the complete system inoperable.
The environment is within acceptable limits, circuits, systems, and components are functioning as designed and no
abnormal condition exists.
Actions taken on the receipt of a signal and the results of those actions
Actions taken on receipt of an alarm signal or of multiple alarm signals and the results of those actions such as: the
actuation of alarm notification appliances, elevator recall, smoke control measures, emergency responder dispatch,
deployment of resources in accordance with a risk analysis and emergency action plan, etc.
Actions taken on receipt of a pre-alarm signal or of multiple pre-alarm signals and the results of those actions such as:
the actuation of notification appliances, dispatch of personnel, investigation of circumstances and problem resolution in
accordance with a risk analysis and action plan, etc.
Actions taken on receipt of a delinquency signal or of a supervisory signal that indicates the presence of a supervisory
condition or of multiple supervisory signals that indicate multiple supervisory conditions, and the results of those actions
such as: the actuation of supervisory notification appliances, the shutdown of appliances, fan shutdown or activation,
dispatch of personnel, investigation of circumstances and problem resolution in accordance with a risk analysis and
action plan, etc.
Actions taken on receipt of a trouble signal or multiple trouble signals and the results of those actions such as: the
activation of trouble notification appliances, dispatch of service personnel, deployment of resources in accordance with
an action plan etc.
A message status indication indicating a condition, communicated by electrical, visible, audible, wireless, or other
means. (SIG-FUN)
A signal indicating an emergency condition or an alert that requires action. A message (in any form) that results from
the manual or automatic detection of an alarm condition including: outputs of activated alarm initiating devices, the light
and sound from actuated alarm notification appliances, etc. (SIG-FUN)
Printed on 1/28/2011
2
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
A signal indicating the need for action in connection with the supervision of guards or system attendants. (SIG-PRO)
A distinctive alarm signal intended to be recognized by the occupants as requiring evacuation of the building. (SIG-PRO)
A signal initiated by An alarm signal that results from the manual or automatic detection of a fire alarm condition
including: outputs from a activated fire alarm-initiating devices such as a manual fire alarm box, automatic fire detector,
waterflow switch, or other device in which activation is indicative of the presence of a fire or fire signature. (SIG-FUN)
A supervisory signal monitoring the performance of guard patrols indicating that a guard has activated a guard’s tour
reporting station. (SIG-PRO)
A message (in any form) that results from the detection of a pre-alarm condition including: outputs of analog initiating
devices prior to reaching alarm levels, information regarding the activities of terrorists, the light and sound from actuated
notification appliances, etc.
A message (in any form) that results from the return to normal (deactivation) of an activated initiating device or system
indicating the absence of an abnormal condition at the location of the initiating device or system.
A signal indicating the need for action in connection with the supervision of guard tours, the fire suppression systems or
equipment, or the maintenance features of related systems. In systems other than those supporting guard’s tour
supervisory service, a message (in any form) that results from the manual or automatic detection of a supervisory
condition including: activated supervisory signal-initiating device outputs, transmissions to supervising stations, the light
and sound from actuated supervisory notification appliances, etc. In systems supporting guard’s tour supervisory
service, a message indicating that a guard has activated a guard’s tour reporting station (not in itself an indication of a
supervisory condition) or a delinquency signal indicating a supervisory condition. (SIG-FUN)
A signal initiated by a system or device indicative of a fault in a monitored circuit, system, or component. A message (in
any form) that results from the manual or automatic detection of a trouble condition including: off-normal outputs from
integrity monitoring circuits, the light and sound from actuated trouble notification appliances, etc. (SIG-FUN)
This proposal is the result of the work of the SIG-ACC Alarm Trouble and Supervisory Task Group
(ATS TG) charged with developing definitions for the use of the terms alarm, trouble and supervisory in the context of
their three forms of use (as a condition or state, as a signal indicating the presence of a state, and as a response or
action in association with receiving a signal). Those participating in the task group were: Larry Shudak, Wayne Moore,
Frank Van Overmeiren, Ray Grill, and Andrew Berezowski. These proposed definitions and revised definitions are
provided for use by other TCs in the ROP meetings so that they might develop proposals to clarify the use of terms
within their chapters and improve the flow/understanding of the code. New definitions and sub-definitions have been
developed for the terms Condition and Response. The term Pre-Alarm has been introduced for possible use in place of
“supervisory smoke detection” and “supervisory carbon monoxide” so that the original meaning of the term Supervisory
might be clarified and preserved. The proposed definitions and revised definitions have been presented as a group so
that they may be evaluated collectively.
Revise the proposed wording to read as follows as follows:
3.3.52 (new) Condition
A situation, environmental state, or equipment state of a fire alarm or signaling system
3.3.52.1 Abnormal (Off-normal) Condition
A condition that warrants some type of signal, notification, communication, response, action or service before the
system can be returned to normal.
3.3.52.1.1 Alarm Condition
An abnormal condition that poses an immediate threat to life, property, or mission.
3.3.52.1.2 Pre-Alarm Condition
An abnormal condition that poses a potential threat to life, property, or mission, and time is available for investigation.
3.3.52.1.3 Supervisory Condition
An abnormal condition in connection with the supervision of guard tours, fire suppression systems or equipment, or the
maintenance features of related systems.
Printed on 1/28/2011
3
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
3.3.52.1.4 Trouble Condition
An abnormal condition due to a fault in a portion of a system monitored for integrity.
3.3.52.2 Normal Condition
Circuits, systems, and components are functioning as designed and no abnormal condition exists.
3.3.228 Response
Actions performed upon the receipt of a signal.
3.3.228.1 Alarm Response
The response to the receipt of an alarm signal.
3.3.228.2 Pre-Alarm Response
The response to the receipt of a pre-alarm signal.
3.3.228.3 Supervisory Response
The response to the receipt of a supervisory signal.
3.3.228.4 Trouble Response
The response to the receipt of a trouble signal.
3.3.240 Signal
A message indicating a condition, communicated by electrical, visible, audible, wireless, or other means.
3.3.240.1 Alarm Signal
A signal that results from the manual or automatic detection of an alarm condition.
A signal that results from the manual or automatic detection of a fire alarm condition. (SIG-FUN)
A signal that results from the detection of a pre-alarm condition.
A signal that results from the return to normal (deactivation) of an activated initiating device or system.
A signal that results from the detection of a supervisory condition. (SIG-FUN)
3.3.240.9
A signal that results from the detection of a trouble condition. (SIG-FUN)
3.3.240.2 Delinquency Signal
A signal that results from the supervision of guards or system attendants. (SIG-PRO)
3.3.240.3 Evacuation Signal
A distinctive signal recognized by the occupants as requiring evacuation of the building. (SIG-PRO)
3.3.240.5 Guards Tour Supervisory Signal A signal monitoring the performance of guard patrols (SIG-PRO)
The TC believes the concept is acceptable however, the definitions need to be clarified.
The TC edits the definitions of 3.3.52.1 Abnormal (Off-normal) Condition and 3.3.52.1.3 Supervisory Condition.
The TC suggests that the TCC direct that the block diagram that was distributed to the TCs be added to the annex.
Printed on 1/28/2011
4
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-38 Log #513a SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Joshua Elvove, U.S. General Services Administration
Revise as follows:
The principal attended or unattended location where the status of the
detection, alarm communications, and control systems is displayed and from which the system(s) can be manually
controlled. (SIG-PRO)
An emergency command center may also include mass notification system control.
NFPA-72 uses the term fire command center over a dozen times but then uses the term emergency
command center in a similar manner in Chapter 24 and Annex D. Because there really is no distinction between how
the two terms are used, only one term should be defined and used in NFPA 72. In concert with other changes being
proposed that replace the term “fire safety function” with “emergency control function”, it is suggested that a similar
approach be taken here. Therefore, this proposal recommends revising the term used in this definition from “fire
command center” to “emergency command center”. In addition, it is recommended that a global replacement be made
to change the term “fire command center” to “emergency command center” wherever it appears in the rest of NFPA 72
(3.3.277, 3.3.277.2, 10.11.3, 10.12.6, 10.16.5, 24.3.4.2, 27.6.3.2.2.1, 27.6.3.2.3.14(4), A.10.8, Figure A.10.18.2.1.1,
C.2.1.3, C.2.1.3.2). In addition, in order to reflect that mass notification control may also be located in an emergency
command center, a new annex is proposed stating such. Proposal developed by SIG-PRO Task Group (Carl Willms Joshua Elvove)
Revise text to read as follows:
3.3.96* Fire Command Center. The principal attended or unattended room or area where the status of the detection,
alarm communications, control systems and other emergency systems is displayed and from which the system(s) can
be manually controlled. (SIG-ECS)
A.3.3.96 The fire command center should contain the following features as applicable to the specific facility:
1. The emergency voice/alarm communication system unit.
2. The fire department communications unit.
3. Fire detection and alarm system annunciator unit.
4. Annunciator unit visually indicating the location of the elevators and whether they are operational.
5. Status indicators and controls for air-handling systems.
6. The required fire-fighter’s control panel for smoke control systems installed in the building.
7. Controls for unlocking stairway doors simultaneously.
8. Sprinkler valve and water-flow detector display panels.
9. Emergency and standby power status indicators.
10. A telephone for fire department use with controlled access to the public telephone system.
11. Fire pump status indicators.
12. Schematic building plans indicating the typical floor plan and detailing the building core, means of egress, fire
protection systems, fire-fighting equipment and fire department access.
13. Worktable.
14. Generator supervision devices, manual start and transfer features.
15. Public address system.
16. Other emergency systems identified in Emergency Response Plan.
"Emergency command center" is no longer referenced in Chapter 24. See action and
statement on 72-445a (Log #CP102).
The TC added material to clarify "fire command center" and additional annex material.
Printed on 1/28/2011
5
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-42 Log #515 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Joshua Elvove, U.S. General Services Administration
Revise as follows:
. A circuit component that interfaces initiating devices or control circuits, or both; notification
appliances or circuits, or both; system control outputs; and other signaling line circuits to a signaling line circuit.
(SIG-PRO)
A system component that connects a signaling line circuit to any
combination of initiating devices, initiating device circuits, notification appliances, notification appliance circuits, system
control outputs, and other signaling line circuits. (SIG-PRO)
. The fire alarm control interface coordinates signals to and from the fire alarm
system and mass notification other systems. (SIG-ECS)
. The interface between the fire alarm system emergency control
function interface device and the control circuit or appliance serving the emergency control function (SIG-PRO)
See Figure A.3.3.127.3.
****Insert Figure 3.3.127.3****
The new definition is necessary in order to define the boundary (or connection) between the fire alarm
system and the emergency control function. Parallel changes are also being proposed for Chapter 3 to better define
emergency control functions (3.3.83) and emergency control function interface devices (3.3.82), and for Chapter 21 to
clarify the wiring requirements between the fire alarm system and the emergency control function interface device, and
the wiring requirements between the emergency control function interface device and the emergency control function
circuit or appliance. The latter is where this new definition is meant to apply. The attached figure aims to clarify the
boundary and where the related terminology applies. Note: the only item in the figure that is not defined is the
emergency control function “circuit or appliance” and I’ve selected this term here only because it’s currently used in
21.2.4. I’m ok with using another term if better suited.
The definition for Fire Alarm Control Interface in 3.3.127.2 as developed by SIG-ECS was changed because the term
only appears in Chapter 24 and applies specifically to mass notification systems. As such, the new definition for
Emergency Control Function Interface will be applicable to emergency control functions and the existing definition for
Fire Alarm Control Interface will be applicable to mass notification systems. Proposal developed by SIG-PRO Task
Group (Carl Willms - Joshua Elvove)
In regards to 3.3.127.2, the TC does not intend to limit the interfaces to only mass notification
systems.
The proposed term noted in 3.3.127.3 is not used in the document.
The TC notes that a proposal to modify 3.3.127.3 has also been submitted to SIG-PRO.
Printed on 1/28/2011
6
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-43a Log #CP111 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise 3.3.136 to read as follows:
3.3.136* Local Operating Console (LOC). A station Equipment used by authorized personnel and emergency
responders to activate and operate an in-building mass notification system. (SIG-ECS)
The word “station” is changed to “equipment” because it is a console; there is no need to call it a
station.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-45 Log #497 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Sean C. Remke, FP&C Consultants, Inc.
Proposal submitted on behalf of the TC-TG on Pathway Survivability.
Revise text to read as follows:
3.3.175 Pathway Survivability. The ability of any conductor, optic fiber, radio carrier, or other means for transmitting
system information to remain operational during fire conditions while exposed to hazards from fire, intentional or
accidental mechanical damage and natural disaster.
Expansion of definition under direction of TCC.
The TC sees survivability as being limited to fire. Other issues: mechanical, intentional or
accidental damage, etc. can be covered in the body of the Code by design requirements.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-48a Log #CP112 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Delete 3.3.217.
3.3.217 Regional Operations Center (ROC). A network control center that covers multiple geographically separated
facilities and installations. (SIG-ECS)
This term is not used in the body of the Code and needs to be removed per the MOS.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-54 Log #49 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Add new text to read as follows:
A distinctive signal intended to alert the occupants of an emergency and provide
instructions.
This is need in order to reinforce the separate Emergency Communications aspect of NFPA 72 under
Chapter 24.
The MOS prevents use of a definition where the term is not used in the Code.
Printed on 1/28/2011
7
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-57 Log #157a SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Jim R. Kern, Kern Technical Services
A defined area within the protected premises. Azone can define an area from which a signal can be
received, an area to which a signal can be sent, or an area in which a form of control can be executed. (SIG-FUN)
A discrete area of a building, bounded by smoke or fire barriers, from which
occupants are intended to relocate or evacuate. An area covered by one or more notification zones that are actuated
simultaneously, in accordance with the emergency plan for the premises. (SIG-PROECS).
An area covered by notification appliances that are activated simultaneously. A discrete
area of a building, bounded by building outer walls, fire or smoke compartment boundaries, floor separations, or other
fire safety subdivisions, from which occupants are intended to relocate or evacuate (SIG-PROECS)
Evacuation signaling zones can be as small as a single room, or as large as
an entire building, but more commonly are an entire floor or portions of floors divided by smoke or fire barriers. A
notification zone is the smallest discrete area used for any announcements or signaling. Depending on the emergency
plan, an evacuation zone may encompass several notification zones. For example, in most high-rise buildings, each
single floor (fire area) is a notification zone. Most emergency plans call for the evacuation zone to be the fire floor, floor
above, and a floor below.
The existing definitions have proven confusing. The rewording is intended to clarify that all occupants
of an evacuation signalling zone will receive the same information and instructions at the same time. If some occupants
of the building are to take differing actions (i.e., wait where they are for further instructions, or move to a different area of
the building) while other occupants are expected to evacuate immediately, separate evacuation signalling zones are
needed for each group of occupants. This was the original intent of the definitions, but the proposed rewording clarifies
that intent.
Revise text as follows:
3.3.300.1*
A discrete area of a building, bounded by smoke or fire barriers, from which
occupants are intended to relocate or evacuate. An area encompassing one or more notification zones that are actuated
simultaneously. (SIG-PROECS).
3.3.300.2
An area covered by notification appliances that are activated simultaneously. A discrete
area of a building, bounded by building outer walls, fire or smoke compartment boundaries, floor separations, or other
fire safety subdivisions, from which occupants are intended to relocate or evacuate (SIG-PROECS)
A.3.3.300.1
Evacuation signaling zones can be as small as a single room, or as large as
an entire building, but more commonly are an entire floor or portions of floors divided by smoke or fire barriers. A
notification zone is the smallest discrete area used for any announcements or signaling. Depending on the emergency
response plan, an evacuation signaling zone may encompass several notification zones. For example, in most high-rise
buildings, each single floor (fire area) is a notification zone. Most emergency response plans call for the evacuation
signaling zone to be the fire floor, floor above, and a floor below.
The TC agrees with the submitter's text and edits for clarity.
In A.3.3.300.1, the TC adds evacuation "signaling" zone for consistency with the definition and adds "response" to
"emergency plans".
Printed on 1/28/2011
8
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-67 Log #117h SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Merton W. Bunker, Jr., US Department of State
(1) Add new Chapter 4 as follows:
****Insert Include 72_L117_R Here****
2. Insert existing Figure 10.18.2.1.1 as new Figure 4.3.2.2.3.2.
3. Insert existing Figure A.10.2.1.1 as Figure A.4.3.2.2.3.2
4. Delete existing Section 10.18 in its entirety, to include Sections A.10.18.1.4, A.10.18.2.1.1, A.10.18.2.3(1), and
A.10.18.2.4.
5. Renumber existing Section 10.19 as Section 10.18.
6. Delete existing Sections 14.6.1.2 and A.14.6.1.2.
1. The items required by the proposed sections are necessary to assist technicians in the proper
installation, programming, and maintenance of the system. Good shop drawings will facilitate a better installation,
resulting in a more reliable and more easily maintained system.
2. These items can, and sometimes do, appear in fire alarm specifications. However, many systems are installed
without the benefit of specifications. In this case, there is no requirement to provide adequate drawings.
3. NFPA 13 contains a similar list of requirements for working drawings in the body of the standard. NFPA 72 should
also contain these requirements.
4. National and local building codes require some of the items added by this proposal. This proposal seeks to place
these requirements in NFPA 72, rather than in a building code.
****Insert Include 72_L117h_docx here****
The TC sees the new chapter as very worthwhile and in the right direction. The TC agrees
with the intent and looks forward to further work on this Chapter.
The TC notes that the sections pertaining to intelligibility should be reviewed. Design issues need to be further
elaborated upon.
The TC merged Proposals 72-67 (Log #117h) and 72-68 (Log #333) in its review and has combined them as written.
There are a number of MOS issues that need to be addressed (eg., normative sections without "shall", requirements in
some annex material, "may" is used in annex).
Printed on 1/28/2011
9
Chapter 4 – Documentation
4.1 Application. All system approvals and documentation shall comply with the requirements of
this chapter.
4.1.1 Systems covered by this standard shall be provided with documentation as outlined by this
chapter.
4.1.2 This chapter outlines a minimum level of documentation that shall be provided for systems
covered under this standard and does not prohibit additional documentation from being provided.
4.1.3 The requirements of other chapters shall also apply unless they are in conflict with this
chapter.
4.1.4 Unless required by other governing laws, codes, or standards, the requirements of this
chapter shall not apply to one and two family residences covered by Chapter 29.
4.1.5* This Chapter does not focus on the design professional’s documentation nor construction
contracts, but recognizes that insufficient initial documentation could lead to problems and a
poor start to any installation project.
A.4.1.5 Currently there is no requirement within this Code for design documents to be prepared
prior to installation. Only that they be submitted to the AHJ if the AHJ requests them. If the AHJ
does not request them, then the installation contractor could install the system without preparing
any design documents or calculations. Prior to installing new systems, replacing an existing
system, or upgrading a system, design documents should be prepared by the responsible design
professional. Design documents could include preliminary plans and project scope issued as
guidance and direction, initial floor plans and concept drawings, a risk assessment, an emergency
response plan, or a combination of these. Systems that are altered should have design documents
prepared that are applicable to the portion(s) of the system being altered.
4.2 Approvals.
4.2.1 Notification. The authority having jurisdiction shall be notified prior to installation or
alteration of equipment or wiring. [10.18.1.1]
4.2.2 Required Documentation. At the authority having jurisdiction’s request, complete
information as required by Section 4.3 shall be submitted for approval. [10.18.1.2*][10.18.2.3]
4.3 Documentation.
4.3.1 Shop Drawings. Shop drawings shall be drawn to an indicated scale, on sheets of uniform
size, with a plan of each floor.
4.3.1.1 General. Shop drawings for fire alarm systems shall provide basic information and shall
provide the basis for the record (as-built) drawings required elsewhere in this Code.
72_L117h_ECS_CA_ROP_A2012 4.3.1.2 Content. Shop drawings, as a minimum, shall include the following information:
(1) Name of protected premises, owner, and occupant (where applicable)
(2) Name of installer or contractor
(3) Location of protected premises
(4) Device legend in accordance with NFPA 170, Standard for Fire Safety and Emergency
Symbols
(5) Date of issue and any revision dates
4.3.1.3 Floor Plans. Floor plan drawings shall be drawn to an indicated scale and shall include,
as a minimum, the following information:
(1) Floor or level identification
(2) Point of compass (indication of north)
(3) Graphic scale
(4) All walls and doors
(5) All partitions extending to within 10 percent of the ceiling height (where applicable)
(6) Room and area descriptions
(7) Fire alarm System device/component locations
(8) Locations of fire alarm primary power connection(s)
(9) Locations of monitor/control interfaces to other systems
(10) System riser Riser locations
(11) Type and number of fire alarm system components/devices on each circuit, on each floor or
level
(12) Type and quantity of conductors and conduit (if used) used for each circuit
(13) Location of all supply and return air diffusers (where automatic detection is used)
(14) Identification of any ceiling over 10 feet in height where automatic fire detection is being
proposed.
(15) Details of ceiling geometries, including beams and solid joists, where automatic fire
detection is being proposed.
(16)* Acoustic properties of spaces with respect to speaker selection and placement to help
ensure intelligibility can be met where voice systems are to be installed.
A.4.3.1.3(16) Achieving intelligibility in certain spaces such as large open or hard surfaced
spaces often requires evaluation of the environmental acoustic properties. The burden of speech
intelligibility is frequently placed on the installing contractor. However, this contractor usually
has no control over the architectural acoustic aspects of a space. Speaker selection and/or
placement frequently have limited effect in such spaces. Therefore, it is essential that the
architects and engineers account for the necessary acoustic treatments and intended speaker
placement during the physical design of the space. Acoustical treatments could include, but not
be limited to sound baffles, sound absorption materials, or other such physical treatments to a
space. Voice delivery components such as speakers, amplifiers, circuiting, etc. should not be
considered acoustical treatments.
4.3.1.4 Riser Diagrams. Fire alarm system System riser diagrams shall be coordinated with the
floor plans and shall include the following information:
(1) General arrangement of the system in building cross-section
(2) Number of risers
72_L117h_ECS_CA_ROP_A2012 (3) Type and number of circuits in each riser
(4) Type and number of fire alarm system components/devices on each circuit, on each floor or
level
(5) Type and quantity of conductors and conduit (if used) for each circuit.
4.3.1.5 Control Unit Diagrams. Control unit wiring diagrams shall be provided for all control
equipment (i.e., equipment listed as either a control unit or control unit accessory), power
supplies, battery chargers, and annunciators and shall include the following information:
(1) Identification of the control equipment depicted
(2) Location(s)
(3) All field wiring terminals and terminal identifications
(4) All circuits connected to field wiring terminals and circuit identifications
(5) All indicators and manual controls, including the full text of all labels
(6) All field connections to supervising station signaling equipment, releasing equipment, and
fire safety control interfaces where provided.
4.3.1.6 Typical Wiring Diagrams. Typical wiring diagrams shall be provided for all initiating
devices, notification appliances, remote indicators, annunciators, remote test stations, and endof-line and power supervisory devices.
4.3.1.7* Input/Output Matrix of Operation. An input/output matrix of operation shall be
provided on with all working shop drawings.
A. 4.3.1.7 See A.14.6.2.4(9) for an example for a matrix of operation.
4.3.1.8 Calculations. System calculations shall be included with shop drawings as follows:
(1) Battery calculations
(2) Loop resistance calculations (if required)
(3) Notification appliance circuit voltage drop calculations
(4) Db loss calculations (Fiber optic cables)
(5) Other required calculations
4.3.1.9* Computer Aided Drafting (CAD) Unless approved otherwise by the authority having
jurisdiction, the architect, engineer, or owner shall make available electronic Computer Aided
Drafting (CAD) files to the entity preparing final shop drawings, and record drawings, when
such files exist.
A.4.3.1.9 Electronic files should allow for drawings to be at required scale. Electronic files
should allow for un-related text, notes, equipment, etc. to be isolated or removed for clarity.
Electronic file floor plans and details should be consistent with those used in drawings issued or
revised for building permits.
4.3.2 Completion Documents. [10.18.2]
4.3.2.1 General. Before requesting final approval of the installation, the installing contractor
shall furnish a written statement stating that the system has been installed in accordance with
72_L117h_ECS_CA_ROP_A2012 approved plans and tested in accordance with the manufacturer’s published instructions and the
appropriate NFPA requirements installation standards. [10.18.1.3]
4.3.2.2 Documentation Required. Every system shall include the following documentation,
which shall be delivered to the owner or the owner’s representative upon final acceptance of the
system:
(1)An owner’s manual and manufacturer’s published instructions covering all system
equipment, as described in Section 4.3.2.2.1
(2) Record (as-built) drawings, as described in Section 4.3.2.2.2
(3) A completed record of completion form
(4) For software-based systems, record copy of the site-specific software
(5) A contractor’s statement as described in Section 4.3.2.1.
4.3.2.2.1 Owner’s Manual. An owner’s manual shall contain the following documentation:
(1) A detailed narrative description of the system inputs, evacuation signaling, ancillary
functions, annunciation, intended sequence of operations, expansion capability, application
considerations, and limitations
(2) A written sequence of operation for the system including an operational input/output matrix.
(3) Operator instructions for basic system operations, including alarm acknowledgment, system
reset, interpretation of system output (LEDs, CRT display, and printout), operation of manual
evacuation signaling and ancillary function controls, and change of printer paper
(4) A detailed description of routine maintenance and testing as required and recommended and
as would be provided under a maintenance contract, including testing and maintenance
instructions for each type of device installed. This information shall include the following:
(a) Listing of the individual system components that require periodic testing and maintenance
(b) Step-by-step instructions detailing the requisite testing and maintenance procedures, and the
intervals at which these procedures shall be performed, for each type of device installed
(c) A schedule that correlates the testing and maintenance procedures that are required by this
section
(5) Detailed troubleshooting instructions for each trouble condition generated from the
monitored field wiring, including opens, grounds, and loop failures. These instructions shall
include a list of all trouble signals annunciated by the system, a description of the condition(s)
that causes such trouble signals, and step-by-step instructions describing how to isolate such
problems and correct them (or how to call for service, as appropriate).]
(65) A service directory, including a list of names and telephone numbers of those who provide
service for the system.
4.3.2.2.2 Record Drawings (As-Builts). Record drawings shall be drawn to an indicated scale,
on sheets of uniform size, with a plan of each floor and shall contain the most current installation
details .
4.3.2.2.2.1 General. Record drawings for fire alarm systems shall provide basic information and
shall reflect the actual installation of all equipment, components, and wiring.
4.3.2.2.2.2 Content. Record drawings shall include the most current installation details of the
items described in 4.3.1.2.
72_L117h_ECS_CA_ROP_A2012 4.3.2.2.2.3 Floor Plans. Floor plan drawings shall be drawn to an indicated scale and shall
include the most current installation details of the items described in 4.3.1.3.
4.3.2.2.2.4 Riser Diagrams. Fire alarm system System riser diagrams shall include the most
current installation details of the items described in 4.3.1.4.
4.3.2.2.2.5 Control Unit Diagrams. Control unit wiring diagrams shall be provided for all
control equipment (i.e., equipment listed as either a control unit or control unit accessory), power
supplies, battery chargers, and annunciators and shall include the most current installation details
of the items described in 4.3.1.5.
4.3.2.2.2.6 Typical Wiring Diagrams. Typical wiring diagrams shall be provided for all
initiating devices, notification appliances, remote indicators, annunciators, remote test stations,
and end-of-line and power supervisory devices.
4.3.2.2.2.7* Input/Output Matrix of Operation. An input/output matrix of operation shall be
provided on with the all record drawings to reflect actual programming at the time of completion.
A. 4.3.2.2.2.7 See A.14.6.2.4(9) for an example for a matrix of operation.
4.3.2.2.3 Record of Completion.
4.3.2.2.3.1* The record of completion form, Figure 4.2.2.2.3.3, shall be permitted to be a part of
the written statement required in 4.3.2.1. When more than one contractor has been responsible
for the installation, each contractor shall complete the portions of the form for which that
contractor had responsibility. [10.18.1.4*]
A.4.3.2.2.3.1 Protected premises fire alarm systems are often installed under construction or
remodeling contracts and subsequently connected to a supervising station alarm system under a
separate contract. All contractors should complete the portions of the record of completion form
for the portions of the connected systems for which they are responsible. Several partially
completed forms might be accepted by the authority having jurisdiction provided that all portions
of the connected systems are covered in the set of forms.
4.3.2.2.3.2 The record of completion form, Figure 4.3.2.2.3.2, shall be permitted to be a part of
the documents that support the requirements of 4.3.3. [10.18.1.5]
4.3.2.2.3.3* The preparation of a record of completion, Figure 4.3.2.2.3.2, shall be the
responsibility of the qualified and experienced person described in 10.4.2. [10.18.2.1.1*]
A.4.3.2.2.3.3 The requirements of Chapter 14 should be used to perform the installation wiring
and operational acceptance tests required when completing the record of completion. The record
of completion form shall be permitted to be used to record decisions reached prior to installation
regarding intended system type(s), circuit designations, device types, notification appliance type,
power sources, and the means of transmission to the supervising station. An example of a
completed record of completion form is shown in Figure A.4.3.2.2.3.3.
72_L117h_ECS_CA_ROP_A2012 4.3.2.2.3.4* The preparation of a record of completion, Figure 4.3.2.2.3.2 shall be in accordance
with 4.3.2.2.3.5 through 4.3.2.3.12. [10.18.2.1.2]
A.4.3.2.2.3.4 The requirements of Chapter 14 should be used to perform the installation wiring
and operational acceptance tests required when completing the record of completion. The record
of completion form shall be permitted to be used to record decisions reached prior to installation
regarding intended system type(s), circuit designations, device types, notification appliance type,
power sources, and the means of transmission to the supervising station. An example of a
completed record of completion form is shown in Figure A.4.3.2.2.3.2.
4.3.2.2.3.5 Parts 1 through 14 of the record of completion shall be completed after the system is
installed and the installation wiring has been checked. [10.18.2.1.2.1]
4.3.2.2.3.6 Parts 15 and 16 of the record of completion shall be completed after the operational
acceptance tests have been completed. [10.18.2.1.2.2]
4.3.2.2.3.7 A preliminary copy of the record of completion shall be given to the system owner
and, if requested, to other authorities having jurisdiction after completion of the installation
wiring tests. [10.18.2.1.2.3]
4.3.2.2.3.8 A final copy of the record of completion shall be provided after completion of the
operational acceptance tests. [10.18.2.1.2.4]
4.3.2.2.3.9 One copy of the record of completion shall be stored at the fire alarm control unit or
other approved location. [10.18.2.1.2.5]
4.3.2.2.3.10 This copy shall be updated to reflect all system additions or modifications and
maintained in a current condition at all times. [10.18.2.1.2.6]
4.3.2.2.3.11 Where not stored at the main fire alarm control unit, the location of these documents
shall be identified at the main fire alarm control unit. [10.18.2.1.2.7]
4.3.2.2.3.12 If the documents are located in a separate enclosure or cabinet, the separate
enclosure or cabinet shall be prominently labeled FIRE ALARM DOCUMENTS. [10.18.2.1.2.8]
4.3.2.2.3.13 Revision. All fire alarm system modifications made after the initial installation shall
be recorded on a revised version of the original record of completion. [10.18.2.2]
4.3.2.2.3.13.1 All changes from the original information shall be shown. [10.18.2.2.1]
4.3.2.2.3.13.2 The revised record of completion shall include a revision date. [10.18.2.2.2]
4.3.2.2.3.14 Alternatives to Record of Completion. A document containing the required
elements of the Record of Completion shall be permitted to be used as an alternative to the
Record of Completion where the installed system contains only certain elements found in the
Record of Completion.
72_L117h_ECS_CA_ROP_A2012 4.3.2.2.3.15 Electronic Record of Completion. Where approved by the authority having
jurisdiction, the Record of Completion shall be permitted to be filed electronically instead of on
paper. If filed electronically the document must be in a format that cannot be modified and that
has been approved by the AHJ.
4.3.2.2.4* Site Specific Software.
A.4.3.2.2.4 With many software-based fire systems, a copy of the site-specific software is
required to restore system operation if a catastrophic system failure should occur. Without a
back-up copy readily available on site, recovery of system operation by authorized service
personnel can be substantially delayed. The intent of this requirement is to provide authorized
service personnel with an on-site copy of the site-specific software. The on-site copy should
provide a means to recover the last installed and tested version of the site-specific operation of
the system. This typically would be an electronic copy of the source files required to load an
external programming device with the site-specific data. This requirement does not extend to the
system executive software, nor does it require that the external programmer software if required
be stored on site. It is intended that this copy of the software be an electronic version stored on a
non-rewritable media containing all of the file(s) or data necessary to restore the system and not
just a printed version of the operation stored on electronic media. One example of a nonrewritable media is a CD-R.
4.3.2.2.4.1 For software-based systems, a copy of the site-specific software shall be provided to
the system owner or owner’s designated representative.
4.3.2.2.4.2 A copy of the site-specific software shall be stored on-site in non-volatile, nonerasable, non-rewritable memory.
4.3.2.2.4.3 The system owner shall be responsible for maintaining these records for the life of the
system for examination by any authority having jurisdiction. Paper or electronic media shall be
permitted.
4.3.3* Verification of Compliant Installation. Where required by the authority having
jurisdiction, compliance of the completed installation with the requirements of this Code, as
implemented via the referring code(s), specifications, and/or other criteria applicable to the
specific installation, shall be certified by a qualified and impartial third-party organization
acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction.
A.4.3.3 This section is intended to provide a basis for the authority having jurisdiction to require
third-party verification and certification that the authority having jurisdiction and the system
owner can rely on to reasonably assure that the fire alarm system installation complies with the
applicable requirements.
4.3.3.1 Verification shall ensure that the installed system includes all components and functions
that those components and functions are installed and operate as required by the contract
documents, that the system has been 100 percent acceptance tested in accordance with Chapter
14, and that all required documentation has been provided to the system owner.
72_L117h_ECS_CA_ROP_A2012 Exception: Where the installation is an extension, modification, or reconfiguration of an existing
system, the verification shall be required for the new work only, and reacceptance testing in
accordance with Chapter 14 shall be acceptable.
4.3.3.2 For supervising station systems, the verification shall also ascertain proper arrangement,
transmission, and receipt of all signals required to be transmitted off-premises.
Exception: Where the installation is an extension, modification, or reconfiguration of an existing
system, the verification shall be required for the new work only, and reacceptance testing in
accordance with Chapter 14 shall be acceptable.
4.3.3.3 Verification shall include written confirmation that any required corrective actions have
been completed.
4.3.4 Records and Record Retention.
4.3.4.1 A complete record of the tests and operations of each system shall be kept until the next
test and for 1 year thereafter.
4.3.4.2 The records shall be available for examination and, if required, reported to the authority
having jurisdiction. Archiving of records by any means shall be permitted if hard copies of the
records can be provided promptly when requested.
4.3.4.3 If off-premises monitoring is provided, records of all signals, tests, and operations
recorded at the supervising station shall be maintained for not less than 1 year.
4.3.4.4 Documents regarding system design and function shall be maintained for the life of the
system.
4.3.4.5 Revisions and alterations to systems shall be recorded and records maintained with the
original system design documents.
4.3.5 Document Accessibility
4.3.5.1 An as-built plans cabinet shall be provided to house the documentation required by
4.3.2.2.2.
4.3.5.2 The cabinet shall be sized so that it can neatly contain all necessary documentation,
including future inspection and service reports.
4.3.5.3 The contents of the cabinet shall be accessible by authorized personnel only.
4.3.5.4 Mass notification system and fire alarm system as-built plans and other related
documentation shall be permitted to be maintained together, including the appearance of both
systems on the same drawings.
72_L117h_ECS_CA_ROP_A2012 4.3.5.5 The requirements of 10.18.3 and Section 14.6 shall be applicable for mass notification
system records and record keeping.
4.3.6* Document Security. Security for systems documentation shall be determined by the
stakeholders.
A.4.3.6 It is recognized that there are circumstances in which the security and protection of some
system documents may require measures other than that prescribed in this standard. Since a
common expectation of MNS is to function during security and/or terrorist events, it may be
critical that system design be protected.
Security for mass notification, and other such system documentation should be determined by the
stakeholders. Where such conditions have been identified, the stakeholders should clearly
identify what and how system documents should be maintained to satisfy the integrity of this
section regarding reviews, future service, modifications, and system support.
Due to freedom of information laws allowing for public access to documents submitted to and
retained by code officials, it may be necessary for secure documents to be reviewed by code
officials at alternate locations. Such conditions should be identified by the stakeholders and
discussed with the authorities having jurisdiction(s) in advance.
Where such documents can not be protected from public access, it should be acceptable to
remove sensitive information from submitted documents as long as the owner retains complete
documents that will be made accessible to the authority having jurisdiction at an owner
designated location.
4.3.7* Risk Assessment Documentation.
4.3.8* Emergency Response Plan Documentation.
72_L117h_ECS_CA_ROP_A2012 Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-68 Log #333 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Scott Lacey, Lacey Fire Protection Engineering
It was suggested that ECS consider a new chapter for “Documentation." Chapter 8 is currently
reserved. This number was used only to maintain a chapter sequence.
***Include 72_L333_R.docx here***
Currently there are several sections related to documentation within the code. There are also a
number of problem areas that are not addressed. The draft provided is an effort to pull criteria into one chapter and to
address new areas.
Several states have tried to address engineering quality problems through licensing boards. This move has been
pushed by the installers. We often hear that more needs to be done to address engineering bid documents. Is it
appropriate that it be addressed in the code as well? There are also many other issues that we regularly hear about and
see more and more in specs because they are good ideas. This is an attempt to introduce many of these areas into the
code so that the AHJ and the bidders can get better documents up front. Language is also provided so that contractors
can get the CAD files necessary to prepare shop drawings. Once proposed, it may be good to run this by AIA to see
how architects feel before it gets pushed too far. AIA may provide assistance in language and/or contract issues.
If this proposal is accepted then the corresponding current documents sections need to be removed from other areas
of the code.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-67 (Log #117h).
Printed on 1/28/2011
10
Proposed new Chapter 8 Documentation by ECS Task Group on Documentation
(Currently, Chapter 8 is a reserved chapter so picked for concept)
8.1 Application.
8.1.1 Systems covered by this standard shall be provided with documentation as outlined by this chapter.
8.1.2 This chapter outlines a minimum level of documentation that shall be provided for systems covered under this standard.
This chapter does not prohibit additional documentation from being provided.
8.1.3 The requirements of other chapters shall also apply unless they are in conflict with this chapter.
8.1.4 Unless required by other governing laws, codes, or standards, the requirements of this chapter shall not apply to one and
two family residences covered by Chapter 29.
8.2 Security of Documentation
8.2.1 It is recognized that there are circumstances in which the security and protection of some system documents may require
measures other than that prescribed in this standard.
8.2.1.1 Security for mass notification, and other such system documentation shall be determined by the stakeholders. Where
such conditions have been identified, the stakeholders shall clearly identify what and how system documents shall be maintained
to satisfy the integrity of this section with regards to, reviews, future service, modifications, and system support.
8.2.1.2 Due to freedom of information laws allowing for public access to documents submitted to and retained by code officials,
it may be necessary for secure documents to be reviewed by code officials at alternate locations. Such conditions shall be
identified by the stakeholders and discussed with the authorities having jurisdiction(s) in advance.
8.2.1.2.1 Where such documents can not be protected from public access, it shall be acceptable to remove sensitive information
from submitted documents as long as the owner retains complete documents that will be made accessible to the authority having
jurisdiction at an owner designated location.
{Since a common expectation of MNS is to function during security and/or terrorist events, it may be critical that system design
be protected. The new language is intended to reinforce this deviation from previous practice as necessary.}
8.3 Approval and Acceptance.
8.3.1 The authority having jurisdiction shall be notified prior to installation or alteration of equipment or wiring.
8.3.2* At the authority having jurisdiction’s request, complete information regarding the system or system alterations, shall be
submitted for approval. Upon request, such documents shall also be submitted to the owner or owners authorized agent.
8.3.3 Neither approval nor acceptance by an authority having jurisdiction, owner, or owner’s agent shall relieve a designer(s) or
installer(s) from providing a system compliant with governing laws, codes, standards, or preliminary plan requirements specified
by an engineer.
8.3.4 Deviations from requirements of governing laws, codes, standards, or preliminary plan requirements specified by an
engineer, shall be clearly identified and documented as such. Documentation of equivalency shall be provided in accordance
with 1.5.
8.3.5* When a system or component is required to be installed in accordance with performance based criteria as specified by a
registered engineer, such systems shall be reviewed and accepted by the respective engineer.
A.8.3.5 Due to unique design and construction challenges, fire protection concepts are often established on performance based
engineering practices. When such practices have been approved by the AHJ, the engineer of record needs to sign off on the final
installation documents to ensure that all conditions have been satisfied. Such engineering analysis may be beyond the
qualifications of the code authority. As such, it is imperative that the engineer of record review and accept final concepts as
accepted by the AHJ.
8.3.6 Alternate means of submittals and reviews shall be permitted as outlined in 8.2.
8.4 Design Documents.
{Currently there is no requirement within 72 for design documents to be prepared before installation. Only that they be
submitted to the AHJ if the AHJ requests them. If the AHJ does not request them then the contractor can install the system
without preparing any design documents or calculations. Tries to address on-going problem of engineers putting a few devices
on bid documents and telling contractor to provide a compliant system. }
8.4.1 Prior to installing new systems, replacing an existing system, or upgrading a system, design documents shall be prepared.
8.4.2 Design documents shall contain information related to the system which shall include specifications, shop drawings,
input/output matrix, battery calculations, notification appliance voltage drop calculations for strobes and speakers, and product
cut-sheets, shall be prepared prior to installation of any new system.
8.4.2 Systems that are altered shall have design documents prepared that are applicable to the portion(s) of the system being
altered.
8.4.3 Design documents may include preliminary plans issued as guidance and direction, shop drawing submittals, risk
assessment, emergency response plan, or a combination of these.
8.4.4 Design documents shall be revised as necessary following installation to represent as-built conditions and include record
drawings.
72/L333/R/A2012/ROP/ P a g e | 1
8.4.5 CAD Files
8.4.5.1 Unless approved otherwise by the authority having jurisdiction and with technical justification, the architect, engineer, or
owner shall make available electronic Computer Aided Drafting (CAD) files to the individual preparing final shop drawings, and
record drawings, when such files exist.
8.4.5.1.1 At minimum, available files shall include base floor plans, elevation details, structural floor/roof framing for exposed
spaces, and details necessary to coordinate for unique protection schemes.
8.4.5.1.2 Any fees for providing electronic files or for converting such files shall be included in preliminary documents, or shall
be provided upon request during the solicitation stage.
8.4.5.1.3 Written agreements, such as contracts limiting or preventing further distribution, shall be permitted.
8.4.5.1.4 Electronic files shall allow for drawings to be at required scale.
8.4.5.1.5 Electronic files shall allow for un-related text, notes, equipment, etc. to be isolated or removed for clarity.
8.4.5.1.6 Electronic file floor plans and details shall be consistent with those used in drawings issued or revised for building
permits.
8.4.5.2 If electronic files can not or will not be made available in accordance with 8.4.5.1, solicitation documents shall indicate
such.
8.4.6 Preliminary Plans
{When poor shop drawings are submitted for review, or systems are improperly installed, investigations frequently find that the
lack of information, inconsistent information, or non-compliant information such as device spacing within bid documents
contribute to system problems. To be competitive in getting a job, contractors regularly must bid device counts based on devices
shown. Engineers often show a few devices on drawings and then hold the installing contractor accountable for providing a code
compliant system with a drawing note. Prior to now, the requirements within this standard are developed and targeted around
the installing contractor. The purpose of this section is to assign initial design accountability where it belongs when an engineer
prepares bid documents. Providing this section provides the AHJ the ability to enforce accountability at the top level. Language
does not require that an engineer be involved, only what is required when an engineer is involved.}
8.4.6.1 Unless required otherwise by governing laws, codes, standards, or an enforcing authority, preliminary plans such as those
used for bidding, solicitation, or for obtaining a building permit, shall comply with section 8.4.6.
8.4.6.2 Performance criteria required in support of alternative means and methods for other codes, standards, or construction
features shall be clearly identified. Such information shall reference applicable waivers, appeals, variances, or similarly approved
deviations from prescriptive criteria.
8.4.6.3 When issued by a registered architect or engineer, the architect or engineer shall provide information outlined by 8.4.6 as
a minimum.
8.4.6.3.1 Such information shall be in compliance with criteria of this standard, listings of the equipment, or performance criteria.
8.4.6.4 When preliminary documents for bidding or solicitation are prepared and issued by a qualified designer other than a
registered architect or engineer, the documents shall contain information outlined in 8.4.6.
8.4.6.4.1 The qualifications of the designer shall be found acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction prior to preparation of
preliminary documents.
8.4.6.5 Preliminary documents shall include the following:
(1) Specifications applicable to the project
(2) When devices are shown on preliminary drawings, the devices shall be located in accordance with standards, listings, and
limitations of the equipment specified around. When no particular product limitations are specified around, the prescriptive
criteria of applicable standards shall be used.
(3) Interface between systems such as fire alarm, mass notification, security, HVAC, smoke control, paging, background music,
audio visual equipment, elevators, access control, other fire protection systems, etc.
(4) Sequence of operation
(5) Survivability of system circuits and equipment
(6) Notification zones, when applicable
(7) Message content for voice systems
(8) Off-site, proprietary, or other means of system monitoring to be provide (as applicable)
(9) Codes and editions applicable to the system(s)
(10) Any specific requirements of the owner, governing authority, or insurance carrier.
(11) Any specific voice delivery components beyond standard industry products required to achieve intelligibility.
8.4.6.6 Acoustic properties of spaces shall be considered with respect to speaker selection and placement to ensure intelligibility
can be met.
A.8.4.6.6 Achieving intelligibility in certain spaces such as large open or hard surfaced spaces often requires evaluation of the
environmental acoustic properties. The burden of speech intelligibility is frequently placed on the installing fire alarm contractor.
However, this contractor has no control over the architectural acoustic aspects of a space. Speaker selection and/or placement
frequently have limited effect in such spaces. Therefore, it is essential that the architects and engineers account for the
necessary acoustic treatments and intended speaker placement during the physical design of the space. It is not practical to
expect a sub contractor to account for such architectural implications during construction.
72/L333/R/A2012/ROP/ P a g e | 2
8.4.6.6.1 The architect, engineer, and/or preliminary design professional shall identify the need for, and provide provisions for
acoustical treatments required to achieve speech intelligibility. The burden to provide an intelligible acoustic environment
beyond the limitations of the voice delivery components shall be independent of the installer responsible for providing final
system shop drawing submittal package.
8.4.6.6.2 Acoustical treatments shall include, but not be limited to sound baffles, sound absorption materials, or other such
physical treatments to a space. Voice delivery components such as speakers, amplifiers, circuiting, etc. shall not be considered
acoustical treatments.
8.4.7 Risk Assessment
8.4.7.1 When a risk assessment is required to be prepared, such as for a mass notification system, findings of the risk assessment
shall be documented.
8.4.7.2 When identified by the stakeholders, security and protection of the risk assessment shall be in accordance with 8.2.1.
8.4.7.3 The risk assessment shall identify the various scenarios evaluated, and the anticipated outcomes.
8.4.7.3.1 The stakeholders shall identify the worthiness of a respective scenario and shall identify if the scenario and outcome
shall be included in documentation.
8.4.7.4 [Provide additional info here]
8.4.8 Emergency Response Plan
8.4.8.1 When an emergency response plan is required to be prepared, such as for a mass notification system, findings of the plan
shall be documented.
8.4.8.2 When identified by the stakeholders, security and protection of the emergency response plan shall be in accordance with
8.2.1.
8.4.8.3 The emergency response plan shall identify the various scenarios evaluated, and the anticipated outcomes.
8.4.8.3.1 The stakeholders shall identify the worthiness of a respective scenario and shall identify if the scenario and outcome
shall be included in documentation.
8.4.8.4 [Provide additional info here]
8.4.9 Shop Drawing Submittal Package
8.4.9.1 Shop drawings shall be prepared to scale.
8.4.9.1.1 Floor plan scale shall be not smaller than 1/8” = 1’ and shall include a bar scale on the respective sheets.
8.4.9.1.2 Drawing package shall include:
(1) Floor plans to scale
(2) Riser details showing all panels, devices, interconnections with other systems, and interconnections between components
(3) Input/Output matrix showing sequence of operation between actions
(4) Battery calculations
(5) Voltage calculations for strobes and speakers
8.4.9.2 Product cut sheets
8.4.9.2.1 Product cut sheets or data sheets shall be provided which include manufacture, model, limitations, listings, and other
features outlining product features.
8.4.9.2.2 Product cut sheets shall be bound and organized as required by the authority having jurisdiction.
8.4.9.3* Calculations.
A.8.4.9.3 [Provide sample calculations in annex]
8.4.9.3.1 Calculations not included on drawings shall be bound and included with submittal.
8.4.9.3.2 Voltage drop calculations on 24 Volt systems shall use a nominal starting voltage of 20.4 volts DC, and an ending
voltage of 16 volts DC, unless listed otherwise.
8.4.9.3.3 Voltage drop calculations for strobes shall be provided in a lump-sum / end-of-line method.
8.4.9.3.4 Voltage drop calculations for strobes prepared using point-to-point method shall allow for a 1 volt safety margin.
8.4.9.3.5 Calculations for speaker circuits shall maintain at least 85% of the starting voltage per circuit.
{Research provided by submitter sponsored by the Phoenix Fire Department and the Arizona Chapter of the Automatic Fire
Alarm Association validated that when point-to-point calculations are used a safety factor is required to account for field
conditions. Report can be made available.}
8.5* Verification of Compliant Installation.
8.5.1Where required, compliance of the completed installation with the requirements of this Code, as implemented via the
referring code(s), specifications, and/or other criteria applicable to the specific installation, shall be certified by a qualified and
impartial third-party organization acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction.
8.5.2 Verification shall ensure that the installed system includes all components and functions, that those components and
functions are installed and operate as required, that the system has been 100 percent acceptance tested in accordance with Chapter
14, and that all required documentation has been provided to the system owner.
72/L333/R/A2012/ROP/ P a g e | 3
Exception: Where the installation is an extension, modification, or reconfiguration of an existing system, the verification shall be
required for the new work only, and reacceptance testing in accordance with Chapter 14 shall be acceptable.
8.5.3 For supervising station systems, the verification shall also ascertain proper arrangement, transmission, and receipt of all
signals required to be transmitted off-premises.
Exception: Where the installation is an extension, modification, or reconfiguration of an existing system, the verification shall be
required for the new work only, and reacceptance testing in accordance with Chapter 14 shall be acceptable.
8.5.4 Verification shall include written confirmation that any required corrective actions have been completed.
8.6 Completion Documents
8.6.1 Record of Completion
8.6.1.1 The preparation of a record of completion, similar to Figure 8.5.1.1, shall be the responsibility of the qualified and
experienced person described in 10.4.2.
8.6.1.2 A customized form developed around the particular system which contains applicable information may be used. The
form is not required to contain information or items that are not applicable to the particular system. The preparation of a record
of completion, similar to Figure 8.5.1.1 shall be in accordance with ??? through ????.
{The current language implies that Figure 10.18.2.1.1 is required to be used. New language clarifies that the figure is a guide
for intended information and not necessarily the only option while maintaining intended criteria of 10.18.2.1.2.1 through
10.18.2.1.2.8.)
8.6.1.3 All systems that are modified after the initial installation shall have the original, or latest overall system, record of
completion revised or attached to show all changes from the original information and shall be identified with a revision date.
8.6.1.4* Where the original, or the latest overall system, record of completion can not be obtained, a new overall system record of
completion shall be provided that documents the system configuration as discovered during the current projects scope of work.
A.8.6.1.4 It is the intent that if an original or current record of completion is not available for the overall system, the installer will
provide a new record of completion that addresses items discovered about the system. The installer will complete the respective
sections related to the overall system that have been discovered under the current scope of work. It is not the intent of this
section to require an in-depth evaluation of an existing system solely for the purpose of completing a system-wide record of
completion.
{Current language assumes that there is always an existing record of completion available, when in fact, it is seldom available.
In addition the current language provides no alternatives. The proposed language is intended to provide direction towards the
intent when no existing documentation is available.}
8.6.2 Record Drawings
8.6.2.1 Shop drawings used throughout installation shall be marked to reflect field variations.
8.6.2.2 Design documents shall be revised to reflect actual conditions of installation.
8.6.2.3 Record drawings shall be turned over to the owner with a copy placed inside the as-built cabinet.
8.6.2.3.1 When identified by the stakeholders and in accordance with 8.2, alternate locations shall be permitted.
8.7 Record Retention.
8.7.1 System Testing. A complete record of system tests and operations of each system shall be kept until the next test and for 1
year thereafter.
8.7.1.1 The test record shall be available for examination and, if required, reported to the authority having jurisdiction. Archiving
of records by any means shall be permitted if hard copies of the records can be provided promptly when requested.
8.7.1.2 If off-premises monitoring is provided, records of all signals, tests, and operations recorded at the supervising station shall
be maintained for not less than 1 year.
8.7.2 System Documents. Documents regarding system design and function shall be maintained for the life of the system.
8.7.2.1 Revisions and alterations to systems shall be recorded and records maintained with the original system design documents.
8.7.2.2 System documents shall include the following as applicable:
(1) Record Drawings
(2) Product data sheets
(3) Alternative means and methods, variances, appeals, etc.
(4) Risk Assessment
(5) Emergency Response Plan
8.7 As-Built Cabinet
8.7.1 With every new system or major renovation a cabinet shall be installed adjacent to the main control panels. This cabinet
shall be sized to accommodate record drawings, product cut sheets, inspection records, and software media.
8.7.2 It shall be permitted to locate the as-built cabinet in an alternate location when such location is clearly identified at the
system panel location.
8.7.3 Unless approved otherwise by the authority having jurisdiction, the as-built cabinet shall be provided with a lock keyed the
same as the system panel.
72/L333/R/A2012/ROP/ P a g e | 4
8.8 Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance
8.8.1 [Provide additional info here]
8.9* Impairments.
8.9.1 The system owner or their designated representative shall be notified when a fire alarm system or part thereof is impaired.
Impairments to systems shall include out-of-service events.
8.9.2 A record shall be maintained by the system owner or designated representative for a period of 1 year from the date the
impairment is corrected.
8.9.3* Where required, mitigating measures acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction shall be implemented for the period
that the system is impaired.
8.9.4 The system owner or owner’s designated representative shall be notified when an impairment period is completed or
discontinued.
72/L333/R/A2012/ROP/ P a g e | 5
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-337 Log #400 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Add text to read as follows:
Add to Section 24.1 Application and renumber subsequent paragraphs
Emergency communications shall be categorized into the following:
which could consist of elements such as:
·
Speakers/Loudspeakers
·
Visible Notification Appliances
·
Fire Voice Notification
·
Electronic Signage
·
Horns/Bells/Sirens
which could consist of elements such as:
·
Short message service (SMS) text (cell phones)
·
Computer pop-ups
·
Tone alert radios
·
Email broadcast (Internet)
·
Automated voice dialing and text messaging
which could consist of elements such as:
·
Satellite/AM/FM radio broadcasts
·
Satellite/off-air TV broadcasts
·
Location-specific messaging
·
Text messaging
which could consist of elements such as:
·
Handheld bullhorns
·
Radio cell phones
·
Two-way radios
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
There is no clear direction on the levels of importance for the various types of mass notification systems and their
effectiveness during an emergency. This designation of tiers allow the designers and creators of the risk analysis clearly
identify tiers or levels of system service.
Add to Section 24.1 Application and renumber subsequent paragraphs:
Emergency communications shall be categorized into the following:
Tier 1 - Intrusive Alerting (building and area)
Tier 2 - Personal Alerting (individual only)
Tier 3 - Public Alerting (via public media)
Tier 4 - Locally Relevant Alerting (ad hoc on site)
A.24.1.6 to read as follows:
A.24.1.6 The tiers are not to be considered as levels of priority. The tiers can be used in combination. Research has
shown that more than one tier has been used to be effective. See
Tier 1 - Intrusive Alerting could include elements such as:
·
Loudspeakers/HPSA/Voice Notification
·
Visible Notification Appliances
·
Electronic Signage
·
Horns/Bells/Sirens
Tier 2 - Personal Alerting could include elements such as:
·
Short message service (SMS) text (cell phones)
·
Computer pop-ups
·
Tone alert radios
·
Email broadcast (Internet)
·
Automated voice dialing and text messaging
Printed on 1/28/2011
11
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
Tier 3 and Tier 4 methods are not governed by this Code but can be considered as mass notification methods and are
included for information purposes.
Tier 3 - Public Alerting could include elements such as:
·
Satellite/AM/FM radio broadcasts
·
Satellite/off-air TV broadcasts
·
Location-specific messaging from public authorities
·
Text messaging from public authorities
Tier 4 - Locally Relevant Alerting could consist of elements such as:
·
Handheld bullhorns
·
Radio cell phones
·
Two-way radios
Add to end of H.1.1 to read as follows:
, 2007
Renumber remaining sections.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and changes the proposed 24.1.3 to new 24.1.6.
Further, the TC edits the submitter's text for clarification, to be more inclusive and adds informational annex material.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-337a Log #CP124 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Replace instances of “one-way” with the term “broadcast” in Section 24.3.6 (now new 24.1.6), and
its annex text, Diagram A.24.3.6 (now A.24.1.6 or 24.1.6) and Title 24.4 One-Way Broadcast Emergency
Communications Systems.
The common characteristic of all systems under 24.4 is that they are used to broadcast a message,
while potentially also provide a two-way mechanism to track responses, in the case of DRMNS 24.4.4, which does not
conform to the description of one-way. The term “broadcast” is more suitable in this case.
The TC does not agree to change “one-way” to “broadcast”. “One-way” is the correct term.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-338 Log #408 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Denise L. Pappas, Valcom, Inc.
Add the following text at the end of the general section of Chapter 24:
2.3xx Power Over Ethernet (POE). Power over Ethernet (POE) shall be allowed to be used for Emergency
Communication Systems.
2.3.xx A dedicated VLAN with sufficient bandwidth to allow communication between devices shall be required.
This proposal was developed by the technical committee task group. The text is being inserted to
address newer technologies using power over Ethernet as the backbone to the main ECS.
The proposal is beyond the scope of SIG-ECS. The TC encourages the submitter to resubmit
based on changes that are being proposed to SIG-FUN.
Printed on 1/28/2011
12
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-338a Log #CP101 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise as follows:
24.3.4 Ancillary Functions
24.3.4.1 Ancillary functions, including the use of a fire alarm system or mass notification system for general paging,
background music, or other non-emergency functions are permitted and shall not interfere with the performance
requirements of the fire alarm system or the mass notification system impair the required operation of the ECS.
Section 3.3.15 defines “ancillary functions.” Ancillary functions apply to both the fire alarm system and
the mass notification system. Thus, the use of the term “ECS” is appropriate. “Impair the required operation” is clearer
language.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-338b Log #CP103 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise 24.3.4.2 to read as follows:
24.3.4.2* Fire alarm system sSpeakers used for ECS functions also providing ancillary functions shall meet the
conditions of either 24.3.4.2 (1) or (2):
(1)
The fire command center or the central control station as applicable shall be constantly attended by trained
personnel, and selective paging is permitted by the authority having jurisdiction.
(2)
All of the following conditions shall be met:
a.
The speakers and associated audio equipment are installed or located with safeguards to resist tampering or
misadjustment of those components essential for intended emergency notification.
b.
The monitoring integrity requirements of Section 10.17 continue to be met while the system is used for
non-emergency purposes.
The term “ECS function” is more appropriate and is consistent with the definition of “ancillary functions”
given in Section 3.3.15. The addition of “central control station” addresses the mass notification system aspect of
ancillary functions.
Printed on 1/28/2011
13
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-338c Log #CP106 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise the following sections to read as follows:
Fire alarm system loudspeakers providing ancillary functions shall meet the conditions of either 24.3.4.2(1)
or (2):
(1)The fire command center shall be constantly attended by trained personnel, and selective paging is permitted by
the authority having jurisdiction.
(2)All of the following conditions shall be met:
(a)The loudspeakers and associated audio equipment are installed or located with safeguards to resist tampering or
mis-adjustment of those components essential for intended emergency notification.
(b)The monitoring integrity requirements of Section 10.17 continue to be met while the system is used for
non-emergency purposes.
The following requirements shall be met for layout and design:
(1)The loudspeaker layout of the system shall be designed to ensure intelligibility and audibility.
(2)Intelligibility shall first be determined by ensuring that all areas in the building have the required level of audibility.
(3)The design shall incorporate loudspeaker placement to provide intelligibility.
Loudspeakers and their enclosures shall be installed in accordance with
Chapter 18.
Loudspeakers used as alarm notification appliances on fire alarm systems shall also be
permitted to be used for mass notification.
Where provided, loudspeakers in each enclosed stairway shall be connected to a separate notification
zone for manual paging only.
Loudspeaker circuits used for mass notification that are not fire alarm
circuits shall be exempt from the monitoring requirements of this Code, provided that alternate methods of achieving
comparable reliability are accepted by the authority having jurisdiction.
Survivability for loudspeaker circuits
used for mass notification shall be determined by the risk analysis for the building.
All of the following features shall be provided in, or added to, the public address system:
(1)Emergency messages must have priority over non-emergency messages.
(2)All individual or zone loudspeaker volume controls must default to the emergency sound level when used for an
emergency mass notification message.
(3)When monitoring of circuit integrity is provided by the public address system, monitoring must continue, even if local
loudspeaker volume controls are placed in the “off” position.
(4)The required visible notification appliance network (i.e., strobes and textual signs) must be provided where required.
It is the intent of the TC to change all references to “speaker(s)” in NFPA 72 to “loudspeaker(s)” when
“speaker(s)” refer to an electro/mechanical transponder designed to be connected to an audio system amplifier circuit. It
is not the intent to change the word “speaker” in the term “High Power Speaker Array” as this is an industry term which
is established.
Printed on 1/28/2011
14
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-339 Log #409 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Denise L. Pappas, Valcom, Inc.
Add text to read as follows:
24.3.4.3 Where ancillary...identified in Chapter14, Table 14.3.1 Visual Inspection Frequencies.
This proposal is being submitted as part of a task group from the ECS Technical Committee.
The additional text directs the user to the exact table required making the code more user friendly.
Revise 24.3.4.3 to read as follows:
24.3.4.3 Where aAncillary functions are not monitored for integrity, they shall be inspected and tested annually
periodically in accordance with the frequency identified in Chapter14 to verify they will not impair the operation of the fire
alarm system or the mass notification system.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and edits to provide clarification.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-340 Log #306 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Neil Packer, Biamp Systems Corp.
Add new text to read as follows:
Ancillary equipment forming part of an ECS system but having no participation in emergency functions shall
be considered non-fire alarm equipment as defined under 23.8.4.3.2.
We propose an explicit expression that Ancillary equipment is non-fire alarm equipment under
23.8.4.3.2. Such equipment may form part of an ECS. However, because it plays no role in emergency functions and
by definition ‘shall not interfere’ with such functions, the listing and monitoring requirements should fall under 23.8.4.3.2
rather than 23.8.4.3.1. Without an explicit statement to this effect, the matter is open to interpretation and possibly error.
The term “ancillary equipment” is not defined. The submitter's requested change is not
consistent with ancillary function as defined in 3.3.15.
See action and statement on 72-338a (Log #CP101).
Printed on 1/28/2011
15
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-341 Log #495 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Sean C. Remke, FP&C Consultants, Inc.
Proposal submitted on behalf of the TC-TG on Pathway Survivability.
Revise text to read as follows:24.3.5.4.1. For systems employing relocation or partial evacuation, a Level 2 or Level 3
pathway survivability shall be required. Risk analysis shall be permitted to reduce pathway survivability to Level 0 or
Level 1.
24.3.5.7. Two-way in-building wired emergency communications systems shall have a pathway survivability of Level 2
or Level 3. Risk analysis shall be permitted to reduce pathway survivability to Level 0 or Level 1.
24.3.5.8.1. Where a two-way radio communications enhancement system, exclusive of the antennae, is used in lieu of
a two-way in-building wire emergency communications system, it shall have pathway survivability of Level 2 or Level 3.
Risk analysis shall be permitted to reduce pathway survivability to Level 0 or Level 1.
24.3.5.9.1. Area of refuge emergency communications systems shall have a pathway survivability of Level 2 or Level
3. Risk analysis shall be permitted to reduce pathway survivability to Level 0 or Level 1.
Based upon the risk assessment, the minimum level of survivability can be reduced to reflect unique
installations where system arrangement, construction classification, fire suppression and/or risk to system is deemed
lower than the prescriptive rules.
The submitter has not provided technical substantiation to justify this change. What the
submitter is asking for can presently be accomplished using a performance-based design.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-342 Log #270 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Peter A. Larrimer, US Department of Veterans Affairs
Modify 24.3.5.4.1 as follows:
For systems employing relocation or partial evacuation, a Level 1, Level 2 or Level 3 pathway survivability
shall be required.
Level 1 pathway survivability (A building fully protected by sprinklers along with wiring within raceways)
is adequate for voice fire alarm communication systems as identified in the existing annex note A23.10.2. To require
level 2 or level 3 pathway survivability is not justifiable for a minimum standard. The safety of the occupants within a
fully sprinklered building is superior to that same building not sprinklered even with a fire alarm system that has level 2
or level 3 pathway survivability and sprinklers should be recognized.
This can presently be accomplished using a performance-based design. The TC refers the
submitter to 23.10.2 of NFPA 72-2010.
Printed on 1/28/2011
16
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-343 Log #525 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Joshua Elvove, U.S. General Services Administration
Revise as follows:
For systems employing relocation or partial evacuation, a Level 1, 2 or Level 3 pathway survivability shall
be required.
Add Level 1 as an additional survivability pathway option for voice systems employing relocation or
partial evacuation. There are three pathway levels listed in Chapter 12 that provide varying degrees of survivability.
Level 1 combines sprinkler systems with wiring in metal raceways, Level 2 offers four means to achieve 2 hr protection,
and Level 3 is a combination of Levels 1 and 2. The Protected Premises committee offered Level 1 and 2 as menu
options and did not profess to establish Level 2 as a “higher” rated level than Level 1. Prior to the 2010 edition,
survivability options included the “sprinkler option” (Level 1) and the four 2 hr protection options (Level 2). See
6.9.10.4.2 of the 2007 edition. ECS chose not to permit the use of Level 1 for voice systems employing relocation or
partial evacuation. This took away a viable option for those owners of sprinklered properties who opt to install their fire
alarm wiring in raceways and feel they have provided an acceptable level of protection for their occupants. Limiting the
survivability options to Level 2 (2 hr protection) or Level 3 is overly conservative and may provide a level of protection
that isn’t warranted. For example, 2 hr protection may be far longer than what is needed if relocation is only to be for a
short time. In another example, Level 2 pathways using either the 2 hr CI cable option or 2 hr fire rated cable options
may actually exceed what the buildings’ fire resistance rating may offer as protection which doesn’t make sense (e.g.,
Type V (000) construction has no structural fire resistance rating). Another point to consider, 10.5.6.3(2) only requires
secondary power for 15 minutes so even with 2 hr cable, the alarm system may not even be capable of providing a
means for communicating with occupants shortly after relocation. I recognize the annex states that “this section is …
not meant to preclude less stringent survivability requirements (if) supported by a risk analysis…” However, the annex
is not where permission for reducing a requirement in the body of the standard should be. The opposite, however, might
be appropriate for an annex (i.e., giving guidance on when it would be prudent to increase the survivability
requirements). Don’t be overly restrictive; it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution; allow Level 1 as a viable option.
This can presently be accomplished using a performance-based design. The TC refers the
submitter to 23.10.2 of NFPA 72-2010.
Also, it is possible that the sprinkler system water supply may be compromised.
In reference to the submitter's comment on 15 minute secondary power; 15 minutes is based on full load operation.
For a long time, the Code anticipated 15 minutes of full load as equated to 2 hours of intermittent operation.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-344 Log #63 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
In-building mass notification systems shall be permitted to have a Level 0 pathway survivability or greater if
determined by a risk analysis. Pathway survivability levels for in-building mass notification systems shall be determined
by the risk analysis.
Chapter 12 Circuits and Pathways has stated the Levels of survivability should not be thought of as a
hierarchy. Therefore SIG-ECS should not indicate that Level 0 or greater shall be determined by the risk analysis. The
required level of survivability should be determined by the risk analysis with no mention to minimal level since level 0 is
included in every level of survivability.
Printed on 1/28/2011
17
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-345 Log #64 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.3.5.6 All circuits for wide-area mass notification systems shall be permitted to have a pathway survivability of Level
0 or greater if determined by a risk analysis. Pathway survivability levels for wide area mass notification systems shall
be determined by the risk analysis.
Chapter 12 Circuits and Pathways has stated the Levels of survivability should not be thought of as a
hierarchy. Therefore SIG-ECS should not indicate that Level 0 or greater shall be determined by the risk analysis. The
required level of survivability should be determined by the risk analysis with no mention to minimal level since level 0 is
included in every level of survivability.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-346 Log #526 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Joshua Elvove, U.S. General Services Administration
Revise as follows:
Two-way in-building wired emergency communications systems shall have a pathway survivability of Level 1,
2 or Level 3.
Add Level 1 as an additional survivability pathway option for two way communication systems. There
are three pathway levels listed in Chapter 12 that provide varying degrees of survivability. Level 1 combines sprinkler
systems with wiring in metal raceways, Level 2 offers four means to achieve 2 hr protection, and Level 3 is a
combination of Levels 1 and 2. The Protected Premises committee offered Level 1 and 2 as menu options and did not
profess to establish Level 2 as a “higher” rated level than Level 1. Prior to the 2010 edition, survivability options included
the “sprinkler option” (Level 1) and the four 2 hr protection options (Level 2). See 6.9.10.4.2 of the 2007 edition. ECS
chose not to permit the use of Level 1 for two way communication systems. This took away a viable option for those
owners of sprinklered properties who opt to install their two way communication wiring in raceways. Limiting the
survivability options to Level 2 (2 hr protection) or Level 3 is overly conservative and may provide a level of protection
that isn’t warranted. For example, 2 hr protection may be far longer than what is needed if two-way communication is
only to be for a short time. In another example, Level 2 pathways using either the 2 hr CI cable option or 2 hr fire rated
cable options may actually exceed what the buildings’ fire resistance rating may offer as protection which doesn’t make
sense (e.g., Type V (000) construction has no structural fire resistance rating). Another point to consider, 10.5.6.3(2)
only requires secondary power for 15 minutes so even with 2 hr cable, the two way communication system may not
even be capable of being operational when it’s called upon to be used. Don’t be overly restrictive; it’s not a
one-size-fits-all solution; allow Level 1 as a viable option.
This can presently be accomplished using a performance-based design. The TC refers the
submitter to 23.10.2 of NFPA 72-2010.
Also, it is possible that the sprinkler system water supply may be compromised.
In reference to the submitter's comment on 15 minute secondary power; 15 minutes is based on full load operation.
For a long time, the Code anticipated 15 minutes of full load as equated to 2 hours of intermittent operation.
Printed on 1/28/2011
18
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-347 Log #496 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Sean C. Remke, FP&C Consultants, Inc.
Proposal submitted on behalf of the TC-TG on Pathway Survivability.
Delete the following text:
24.3.5.8.2. Where a two-way radio communications enhancement system is used in lieu of a two-way in-building wired
emergency communications system, the design of the system shall be approved by the authority having jurisdiction.
Item is redundant based on requirement found at 24.5.2.1.2.
The two sections are not related. The TC does not see the redundancy as discussed by the
submitter. The submitter is requested to review and resubmit at the ROC.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-348 Log #527 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Joshua Elvove, U.S. General Services Administration
Revise as follows:
Area of refuge emergency communications systems shall have a pathway survivability of Level 1, 2 or Level
3.
Add Level 1 as an additional survivability pathway option for area of refuge communication systems.
There are three pathway levels listed in Chapter 12 that provide varying degrees of survivability. Level 1 combines
sprinkler systems with wiring in metal raceways, Level 2 offers four means to achieve 2 hr protection, and Level 3 is a
combination of Levels 1 and 2. The Protected Premises committee offered Level 1 and 2 as menu options and did not
profess to establish Level 2 as a “higher” rated level than Level 1. Prior to the 2010 edition, survivability options included
the “sprinkler option” (Level 1) and the four 2 hr protection options (Level 2). See 6.9.10.4.2 of the 2007 edition. ECS
chose not to permit the use of Level 1 for area of refuge communication systems. This took away a viable option for
those owners of sprinklered properties who opt to install their area of refuge communication system wiring in raceways.
Limiting the survivability options to Level 2 (2 hr protection) or Level 3 is overly conservative and may provide a level of
protection that isn’t warranted. For example, 2 hr protection may be far longer than what is needed if area of refuge
communication is only to be for a short time. In another example, Level 2 pathways using either the 2 hr CI cable option
or 2 hr fire rated cable options may actually exceed what the buildings’ fire resistance rating may offer as protection
which doesn’t make sense (e.g., Type V (000) construction has no structural fire resistance rating). Another point to
consider, 10.5.6.3(2) only requires secondary power for 15 minutes so even with 2 hr cable, the area of refuge
communication system may not even be capable of being operational when it’s called upon to be used. Don’t be overly
restrictive; it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution; allow Level 1 as a viable option.
This can presently be accomplished using a performance-based design. The TC refers the
submitter to 23.10.2 of NFPA 72-2010.
Also, it is possible that the sprinkler system water supply may be compromised.
In reference to the submitter's comment on 15 minute secondary power; 15 minutes is based on full load operation.
For a long time, the Code anticipated 15 minutes of full load as equated to 2 hours of intermittent operation.
Printed on 1/28/2011
19
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-349 Log #491 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
James M. Mundy, Jr., Asset Protection Associates, Ltd.
Add new section 24.3.5.13 to read as follows:
Wiring of all notification appliances and voice communication shall be designed and installed in a fashion such that not
less than 40 percent nor more than 60 percent of the appliances within a single zone shall be rendered compromised or
inoperative due to attack by fire or wiring derangement. Adjacent appliances shall be connected to different notification
appliance circuits within the evacuation zone. The design shall incorporate a connection mixture so that a single device
or circuit malfunction shall permit maximum notification device continuous operation within the evacuation zone.
Significant experience within high rise jurisdictions even when installed under past code requirements
does not permit compromise of other than a single zone. Where large or complex occupant zones (especially when
open landscaped mercantile and office facilities are utilized) no provision is made for continuous operation within the
zone. This needlessly places persons with no notification other than from adjacent zones whether an attack by fire or
operational cessation occurs due to mechanical wiring faults. By using notification appliances alternately connected
within the same zone, a higher degree of reliability and occupant safety is achieved.
The TC has no way of determining the wiring derangement. Wiring in the fashion suggested
does not increase survivability.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-349a Log #CP100 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Renumber 24.3.6* to be 24.1.6*
Renumber A.24.3.6 to be A.24.1.6
The TC relocates 24.3.6* to new 24.1.6* as it is now in a more appropriate location.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-350 Log #430 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Robert P. Schifiliti, R. P. Schifiliti Associates, Inc.
Delete 24.3.6.
Delete the title 24.4 One-Way Emergency Communications Systems.
Promote existing 24.4.1 to be 24.4 and add One-Way at the beginning of the title. Promote existing 24.4.2 to be 24.5
and add One-Way at the beginning of the title. Promote existing 24.4.3 to be 24.6 and add One-Way at the beginning of
the title. Promote existing 24.4.4 to be 24.7 and add One-Way at the beginning of the title.
The title is merely a description that causes everything under it to have one more decimal point. There
are no General requirements that apply to both subsystems. By promoting the subsections, they will now be found in
the Table of Contents. Adding One-Way to the titles is optional and might be best left out to allow future requirements
for feedback/two-way systems. For example DRMNS can have a two-way feedback to assure delivery and can have
two way communications (email for example).
The TC does not accept the submitter's recommendation. The TC believes the title, being the
first number, is appropriate.
Printed on 1/28/2011
20
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-351 Log #431 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Robert P. Schifiliti, R. P. Schifiliti Associates, Inc.
Add new 24.3.6 (and renumber existing 24.3.6) to read as follows:
24.3.6 * All systems listed after January 1, 2014 that have microphones or handsets for manual voice announcements
shall be provided with level meters or indicators to provide the user with visual feedback about their speaking level.
A.24.3.6 Users that speak too softly, too loudly or that hold a microphone too close, too far or at an incorrect angle can
introduce distortion or cause reduced intelligibility of the spoken message. VU meters (or LEDs) are common features
that provide immediate feedback to the talker. The characteristics of the system microphone are important ergonomic
factors that affect voice intelligibility. Some microphones need to be held close to the mouth, perhaps an inch or less.
Others need to be three or four inches away. How is the user to know what’s ideal? A simple diagram next to the
microphone can help. Some microphones are very directional and must be held flat in front of the speaker’s mouth.
These microphones are useful in small command centers, since they’re less likely to pick up conversations off to the
sides. On the other hand, microphones with a wider polar sensitivity are more forgiving for a user to hold comfortably
while moving and doing other tasks. Their downside is that they will pick up extraneous noise in poorly designed
command centers.
Users that speak too softly, too loudly or that hold a microphone too close, too far or at an incorrect
angle can introduce distortion or cause reduced intelligibility of the spoken message. VU meters (or LEDs) are common
features that provide immediate feedback to the talker.
24.3.2 Microphone Use.
24.3.2.1 All users of systems that have microphones for live voice announcements shall be provided with posted
instructions for using the microphone.
24.3.2.2* All systems listed after January 1, 2016, that have microphones for live voice announcements shall be
provided with one or more of the following:
1. A method for automatically electronically controlling the amplitude of the speaker’s voice
2.
Visual meters or indicators that provide indication of the level of audio being
A.24.3.2.2 Users that speak too softly, too loudly or that hold a microphone too close, too far or at an incorrect angle
can introduce distortion or cause reduced intelligibility of the spoken message. VU meters (or LEDs) are common
features that provide immediate feedback to the talker. The characteristics of the system microphone are important
ergonomic factors that affect voice intelligibility. Some microphones need to be held close to the mouth, perhaps an inch
or less. Others need to be three or four inches away. How is the user to know what’s ideal? A simple diagram next to the
microphone can help. Some microphones are very directional and must be held flat in front of the speaker’s mouth.
These microphones are useful in small command centers, since they’re less likely to pick up conversations off to the
sides. On the other hand, microphones with a wider polar sensitivity are more forgiving for a user to hold comfortably
while moving and doing other tasks. Their downside is that they will pick up extraneous noise in poorly designed
command centers.introduced into the microphone
Renumber remaining sections.
The TC accepts the submitter's text but changes the date from 2014 to 2016. The TC
chooses to extend the date to 2016.
The TC believes that additional requirements for posted instructions be added.
The TC changes "manual voice" to "live voice" for consistency.
The TC relocates the text to 24.3.2.
Printed on 1/28/2011
21
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-352 Log #437 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Robert P. Schifiliti, R. P. Schifiliti Associates, Inc.
Add new 24.3.6 (and renumber existing 24.3.6) to read as follows:
24.3.6* All control units listed after January 1, 2014 that have microphones or handsets for manual voice
announcements shall be provided with a switch, button or other control feature to select "emergency Microphone Use"
or" Non-Emergency Microphone Use" that must be operated before the microphone can be used. The switch button or
other control feature shall be programmed as required by the system design and risk analysis for activation or
non-activation of other signaling and control features such as strobes and other visual systems or other emergency
control functions such as door control or ventilation control.
A.24.3.6 Systems that combine general use voice paging with either emergency voice alarm communications systems
or mass notification systems are being permitted and installed. For general paging, activation of emergency strobes is
probably not desired as it contributes to the Cry Wolf Syndrome. However, where the design intends for users to be
able to quickly pick up a microphone and make emergency announcements, it might be necessary to ensure that the
user activates certain other features as well, such as strobes or other visual signaling and communication systems.
Systems that combine general use voice paging with either emergency voice alarm communications
systems or mass notification systems are being permitted and installed. For general paging, activation of emergency
strobes is probably not desired as it contributes to the Cry Worlf Syndrome. However, where the design intends for
users to be able to quickly pick up a microphone and make emergency announcements, it might be necessary to ensure
that the user activates certain other freatures as well, such as strobes or other visual signaling and communication
systems.
currently in the Code.
Printed on 1/28/2011
The TC believes that that the change would lose the existing hierarchy and priority of signals
22
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-353 Log #11 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Bruce Fraser, Fraser Fire Protection Services
Revise 24.4.1.4 Tones, to read as follows:
The tone preceding any message shall comply with 24.4.1.4.1 through 24.4.1.4.4.
The tone preceding any message shall be permitted to be part of the voice message or to be transmitted
automatically from a separate tone generator.
Except as specified in 24.4.1.4.3, in occupancies where sleeping accommodations are provided and the
voice message is intended to communicate information to those who could be asleep, a low-frequency tone that
complies with the following shall be used:
(1) The tone shall be a square wave or provide equivalent awakening ability
(2) The square wave shall have a fundamental frequency of 520 Hz ± 10 percent.
The intent of this low frequency tone is to accommodate those with mild to severe hearing loss. See also
18.4.5, A.18.4.5 and A.29.3.8.2. The effective date listed in Chapter 18 for using a low frequency signal has not been
allowed in this section (24.4.1.4) because voice systems are easily adapted to comply, whereas the requirements of
18.4.5 also apply to stand-alone tone signaling appliances.
In areas where sleeping accommodation are provided, but the voice communication system is used to
communicate to occupants who are awake, the low frequency tone shall not be required.
Sleeping accommodations are provided in occupancies such as healthcare, detention and correction, and
other occupancies where it would not be necessary to utilize a low frequency tone that awakens those sleeping. For
example, in a hospital, the voice message is used to notify staff members who are already awake. The staff will then
respond to the appropriate location in the hospital to carry out their duties which may include awakening and relocating
patients who may be in danger. In addition, fire drills are required to be conducted on a regular basis and providing a
low frequency tone could unnecessarily awaken patients, which would be detrimental to their care.
Audible signal tones for alert or evacuation shall meet the audibility requirements of either 18.4.3 (Public
Mode Audible Requirements), 18.4.4 (Private Mode Audible Requirements), 18.4.5.1 and 18.4.5.2 (Sleeping Area
Requirements), or 18.4.6 (Narrow Band Tone Signaling for Exceeding Masked Thresholds), as applicable.
If a voice communication system is used and the intent is to awaken occupants and to communicate
information to them, the new wording would require the use of the 520 Hz alert tone to awaken those occupants.
However, the current wording needs to be revised as there are occupancies where sleeping accommodations are
provided that may have a voice communication system where it is not the intent to awaken those sleeping occupants,
but to notify staff members to take appropriate action for those who are asleep. These occupancies can include
healthcare occupancies (sleeping patients), daycare occupancies (infants/small children/adults unable to take action),
detention and correctional occupancies (incarcerated occupants unable to exit), and educational occupancies (nurses
offices with sleeping accommodations). Unless this situation is addressed, the tone in question would be required for
instances where it is not desirable, and could even be detrimental to the building emergency plan.
Regardless of whether the system is required to awaken or to alert persons who are already awake, the tone signal
must meet the audibility requirements of Chapter 18.
The new wording in 24.4.1.4.2 along with 24.4.1.4.3 and A.24.4.1.4.3 addresses the occupancies and situations listed
above. Also, new paragraph 24.4.1.4.4 addresses the audibility of the tone signals.
In summary, this TIA would correct an unintended and undesirable consequence of the floor action which revised
Section 24.4.1.4 by acceptance of a Certified Amending Motion at the NFPA meeting last June (2009) in Chicago.
Insofar as the emergency nature of this TIA, it is directly related to item 5.2(f) of the Regulations Governing Committee
Projects, Section 5 Tentative Interim Amendments. See the following excerpt:
Revise 24.4.1.4.2 to read as follows:
24.4.1.4.2* Except as specified in 24.4.1.4.3, in occupancies where sleeping accommodations are provided and the
Printed on 1/28/2011
23
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
voice message is intended to communicate information to those who could be asleep, a low-frequency tone that
complies with 18.4.5 shall be used.
The TC changes 24.4.1.4.2 to correlate with Chapter 18.
The TC accepts the remainder of the submitter's text.
Printed on 1/28/2011
24
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-353a Log #CP107 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Add new 24.4.1 General.
Renumber remaining sections beginning with existing 24.4.1
Relocate 24.4.2.17* Message Content. in its entirety and associated annex material to 24.4.1.1*.
Renumber remaining sections.
Renumber 24.4.1.1 to 24.4.1.2.
Renumber remaining sections.
Add new:
24.4.1.1* Message Content. Messages shall be developed for each scenario developed in the emergency response
plan.
24.4.1.2 A message template shall be developed for each message required in 24.4.1.1.
(renumber balance )
A.24.4.1.1 A well-crafted, evidence-based message (incentive to response) with content that includes the following:
What: Guidance on what people should do
When: An idea of when they need to act
Where: Description of the location of the risk of hazard (who should be taking action and who should not be)
Why: Information on the hazard and danger/consequences
Who: The name of the source of the warning (who is giving it)
Warning style is also crucial and should be specific, consistent, certain, clear, and accurate with attention paid to the
frequency - the more it is repeated, the better.
Add new H.1.2.12
Keating, John P. and Loftus, Elizabeth F., “People Care in Fire Emergencies – Psychological Aspects, 1975” SFPE,
1975
Renumber remaining sections.
Add new H.1.2.15 and renumber each consecutively and renumber balance.
(1)Cherry, E.C. Some Experiments on the Recognition of Speech, With One and With Two Ears. Journal of
Acoustical Society of America, 1953, 25, 975-979.
(2) Cherry, E,C. & Taylor, W.K. Some Further Experiments on the Recognition of Speech With One and Two Ears.
Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 1954, 26, 554-559.
(3) Michelle Ball and Dorothy Bruck, “The Salience of Fire Alarm signals for Sleeping Individuals: A Novel
Approach to Signal Design,” 3rd International Symposium on Human Behaviour in Fire 2004. Belfast: Interscience
Communications and Ulster University, 2004, pp. 303-314.
(4) Dorothy Bruck and Ian Thomas Comparison of the Effectiveness of Different Fire Notification Signals in Sleeping
Older Adults Fire Technology Volume 44, Number 1, 15-38
(5) M. Ball and D. Bruck, ‘‘The Effect of Alcohol Upon Response to Fire Alarm Signals in Sleeping Young Adults’’, in
Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Human Behaviour in Fire (Belfast), J. Shields (ed.), Interscience
Communications, London, UK, 2004, pp. 291–302.
(6) Lars Benthorn and Hakan Frantzich Fire Alarm in a Public Building: How do People Evaluate Information and
Choose an Evacuation Exit? Fire and Materials 23, 311-315 (1999)
(7) Proulx, G. Occupant behaviour and evacuation Proceedings of the 9th International Fire Protection Symposium,
Munich, May 25-26, 2001, pp. 219-232
(8) Zhang, L., Sun, X., Zhang, K.: A Research of Speech Signal on Fire Information Display Interface. China Safety
Science Journal 16(4), 13–18 (2006)
(9) Alla Keselman, Laura Slaughter and Vimla L. Patel Toward a framework for understanding lay public’s
comprehension of disaster and bioterrorism information Journal of Biomedical Informatics Volume 38, Issue 4, August
2005, Pages 331-344
(10) Sabrina Koreimann, Sabine Strauß, Oliver Vitouch Inattentional Deafness Under Dynamic Musical Conditions
Proceedings of the 7th Triennial Conference of European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music (ESCOM 2009)
Jyväskylä, Finland pp. 246-249
(11) Maha Nasrallah, David Carmel, Nilli Lavie, Murder, She Wrote: Enhanced Sensitivity to Negative Word Valence,
Emotion, 2009, Vol. 9, No. 5, 609–618
(12) JT Siegel, JK Burgoon, Expectancy theory approaches to prevention: Violating adolescent expectations to
Printed on 1/28/2011
25
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
increase the effectiveness of public service announcements in William D. Crano, Michael Burgoon Mass media and drug
prevention: classic and contemporary theories and research
(13) Timothy R. Levine; Lori N. Anders; John Banas; Karie Leigh Baum; Keriane Endo; Allison D. S. Hu; Norman C. H.
Wong, Norms, expectations, and deception: A norm violation model of veracity judgments Communication Monographs,
Volume 67, Issue 2 June 2000 , pages 123 – 137
(14) Mirjam Broersma and Kees de Bot, Triggered codeswitching: A corpus-based evaluation of the original triggering
hypothesis and a new alternative, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 9 (1), 2006, 1–13
(15) Mirjam Broersma, Triggered codeswitching between cognate languages, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 12
(4), 2009, 447–462
(16) JE Driskell, RP Willis, C Copper, Effect of overlearning on retention, Journal of Applied Psychology 1992, Vol. 77,
No. 5, 615-622
The TC wishes to include information to assist in developing message content for emergency
messages.
A General section is added so that the message content information applies to all one-way communications systems.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-354 Log #313 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Andrew B. Woodward, Arup
Delete text as follows:
24.4.1.1.1 When the monitoring location is constantly attended by trained operators, and operator acknowledgment of
receipt of a fire alarm or other emergency signal is received within 30 seconds, automatic response shall not be
required.
A fire emergency voice alarm communications system should respond automatically even if the
monitoring location is constantly attended. During an emergency the operator may have a delayed response, which will
impact occupant notification. Current fire alarm systems are capable of being programmed to provide notification in
accordance with the emergency response plan.
The submitter has not provided technical substantiation for the change. The TC believes the
permissive language should remain.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-355 Log #314 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Andrew B. Woodward, Arup
Revise text to read as follow:
24.4.1.2.1 Evacuation messages shall be preceded and followed by a minimum of two three cycles of the emergency
evacuation signal specified in 18.4.2.
Throughout Chapter 24 the number of cycle of the emergency evacuation signal is inconsistent. This
proposal corrects the inconsistency.
The TC disagrees with the submitter's substantiation.
Three cycles at the end of a message is too long. The TC chooses to retain two cycles.
Printed on 1/28/2011
26
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-356 Log #528 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Joshua Elvove, U.S. General Services Administration
Revise as follows:
Unless otherwise permitted by 24.4.1.8, evacuation messages shall be preceded and followed by a
minimum of two cycles of the emergency evacuation signal specified in 18.4.2
24.4.1.8.2.2 offers alternative fire alarm notification scheme where approved. 24.4.1.2.1 potentially
conflicts with this provision. Hence, text needs to be provided that lets the code user know that they are not necessarily
bound by 24.4.1.2.1. Note: if the intent of 24.4.1.2.1 is not meant to be in conflict with 24.4.1.8.2.2, then clarifying
(annex) text stating so would be helpful.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-357 Log #328 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Thomas J. Parrish, Telgian
Delete the following text:
24.4.1.2.2 Voice messages shall comply with the requirements of 24.3.1.
The requirements for voice messages are stated earlier in the document in section 24.3.1. This text is
redundant and can lead to confusion. The general requirements of 24.3.1 already apply so why restate it. This proposal
is the result of a Task Group formed at the Pre-ROP meeting.
The TC believes that the reference to 24.3.1 is required to not lose the intent of the
requirements in the various types of systems.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-358 Log #330 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Thomas J. Parrish, Telgian
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.1.2.2.1 The following requirements shall be met for layout and design:
(1) The speaker layout of the system shall be designed to ensure intelligibility and audibility.
(2) Intelligibility shall first be determined by ensuring that all areas in the building have the required level of audibility.
(3) The design shall incorporate speaker placement to provide intelligibilty.
The requirements for speaker layout are stated in item number one. If the system is designed and
installed as per a design meeting sections 1 and 2 of this section, then the third bullet point is redundent and could lead
to confusion. This proposal is the result of a Task Group formed at the Pre-ROP meeting.
Printed on 1/28/2011
27
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-359 Log #433 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Robert P. Schifiliti, R. P. Schifiliti Associates, Inc.
Revise 24.4.1.2.2.2* to read as follows:
24.4.1.2.2.2*System design shall incorporate designation of acoustically distinguishable spaces (ADS) within the
occupied occupiable areas as required in Chapter 18.
Revise 24.7.7.2 to read as follows:
24.7.7.2 Number of Persons. The analysis shall be based on the maximum number of people that every occupied
occupiable room, building, area, space, campus, or region is expected to contain.
The word “occupied” depends on factors such as time of day. The need for certain features depends
only on whether the space is “occupiable”. The NFPA Glossary of Terms preferred definitions for occupiable and
occupiable area have been submitted for inclusion in chapter 3. For reference, they are:
3.3.118 * Occupiable. A room or enclosed space designed for human occupancy.
3.3.119 * Occupiable Area. An area of a facility occupied by people on a regular basis.
A.3.3.118 The term “occupiable” is used in this code and in other governing laws, codes, or standards to determine
areas that require certain features of a system. It is important for designers to understand that unless otherwise
required, spaces that are not occupiable might not require or need coverage by initiating devices or occupant notification
appliances. For example, most closets would not be considered to be occupiable. However, a space of the same size
used as a file room would be considered occupiable.
Revise 24.7.7.2 to read as follows:
24.7.7.2
The analysis shall be based on the maximum occupant load calculation for every
occupied occupiable room, building, area, space, campus, or region is expected to contain.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and edits 24.7.7.2 to reference specifically to the
occupant load calculation.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-360 Log #399 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.1.2.2.4 18.4.10.2.1 Unless specifically required by the authority having jurisdiction, intelligibility shall not be
required in ADSs that only contain the following locations:(1) Private bathrooms, shower rooms, saunas and similar
rooms/areas(2) Mechanical/electrical/elevator equipment rooms(3) Elevator cars(4) Individual offices(5) Kitchens(6)
Storage rooms(7) Closets(8) Rooms/areas where intelligibility cannot reasonably be predicted.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
In-Building Mass Notification section does not provide a requirement for intelligibility. The relocation from 24.4.1.2.2.4
to 18.4.10.2.1 will provide clarification on where intelligibility shall be provided.
Printed on 1/28/2011
28
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-360a Log #598 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Thomas P. Hammerberg, Automatic Fire Alarm Association, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.1.4.1 In occupancies where sleeping accommodations are provided, the pre-alert tone shall include a low
frequency component of 520 Hz square wave range to accommodate the need of the hearing impaired for fire voice
messages and emergency communication messages.
The hearing impaired are referenced and require visual signaling appliances. Section 18.4.5.3 just
uses the term sleeping rooms. No reference to hearing impaired. This change is to correlate with Chapter 18.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-361 Log #315 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Andrew B. Woodward, Arup
Add text to read as follows:
24.4.1.5.5.1 The location having control of the system shall be identified by a visible indication at all locations that are
capable of controlling of the system.
Buildings may have several locations that are capable of controlling the fire alarm system. During an
emergency it is important that the location in control is known to emergency responders that may be unable to take
control the system.
The submitter has not provided technical substantiation for this change.
The TC does not agree with the proposed text. This will overly complicate the system operation for a minimum Code.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-362 Log #65 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Add new text as follows:
24.4.1.5.7 If live voice instructions are provided, they shall perform as follows:
(1) Override previously initiated signals to the selected notification zone(s).
(2) Have priority over any subsequent automatically initiated signals to the selected zone(s).
(3) If a previously initiated recorded message is interrupted by live voice instructions, upon releasing of the
microphone, those previously initiated recorded messages shall stop playing.
Emergency communications systems voice equipment typically has the option of returning to the
prerecorded message upon the release of the microphone. If an operator takes over the system and provides
instructions to the occupants, those instructions should not be contradicted by any prerecorded message.
Add new text as follows:
24.4.1.5.7 If live voice instructions are provided, they shall perform as follows:
(1) Override previously initiated signals to the selected notification zone(s).
(2) Have priority over any subsequent automatically initiated signals to the selected notification zone(s).
(3) If a previously initiated recorded message is interrupted by live voice instructions, upon releasing of the
microphone, the previously initiated recorded messages to the selected notification zones shall not resume playing
automatically unless required by the emergency response plan.
The TC edits the submitter's text for clarity and consistency.
Printed on 1/28/2011
29
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-363 Log #66 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.1.7.4 The fire alarm system shall not automatically override emergency mass notification messages. Priority of
mass notification messages over fire alarm evacuation shall be permitted when evaluated by the stakeholders through a
risk analysis in accordance with 24.4.2.2.
24.4.1.7.4.1 Priority of mass notification messages over fire alarm evacuation shall be permitted when evaluated by the
stakeholders through a risk analysis in accordance with 24.4.2.2.
Modified text to conform with the manual of style. No original text was deleted or added to 24.4.1.7.4.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.1.7.4 The fire alarm system shall not automatically override emergency mass notification messages. Priority of
mass notification messages over fire alarm evacuation shall be permitted when evaluated by the stakeholders through a
risk analysis in accordance with 24.4.2.2.
24.4.1.7.5 Priority of mass notification messages over fire alarm evacuation shall be permitted when evaluated by the
stakeholders through a risk analysis in accordance with 24.4.2.2.
The TC edits the text to comply with the MOS.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-364 Log #151 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Lynn Nielson, City of Henderson
Revise text to read as follows:
Where provided, Sspeakers in each enclosed stairway, each exit passageway, and each group of elevator
cabs within a common shaft shall be connected to a separate notification zones for manual paging only.
Other codes and standards require speakers for manual paging for specific areas a separate zones.
Revise text to read as follows:
Where provided, speakers in each enclosed stairway, each exit passageway, and each group of elevator
cars within a common shaft shall be connected to a separate notification zones for manual paging only.
The TC accepts the submitter's recommendation but chooses to retain "where provided" and
changes "cabs" to "cars".
Printed on 1/28/2011
30
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-365 Log #490 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
James M. Mundy, Jr., Asset Protection Associates, Ltd.
Add new section 24.4.1.8.4.8 to read as follows:
Wiring of all notification appliances and voice communication shall be designed and installed in a fashion such that not
less than 40 percent nor more than 60 percent of the appliances within a single zone shall be rendered compromised or
inoperative due to attack by fire or wiring derangement. Adjacent appliances shall be connected to different notification
appliance circuits within the evacuation zone. The design shall incorporate a connection mixture so that a single device
or circuit malfunction shall permit maximum notification device continuous operation within the evacuation zone.
Significant experience within high rise jurisdictions even when installed under past code requirements
does not permit compromise of other than a single zone. Where large or complex occupant zones (especially when
open landscaped mercantile and office facilities are utilized) no provision is made for continuous operation within the
zone. This needlessly places persons with no notification other than from adjacent zones whether an attack by fire or
operational cessation occurs due to mechanical wiring faults. By using notification appliances alternately connected
within the same zone, a higher degree of reliability and occupant safety is achieved.
The TC has no way of determining the wiring derangement. Wiring in the fashion suggested
does not increase survivability.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-366 Log #312 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Andrew B. Woodward, Arup
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.1.9.2 If multiple notification appliance circuits are provided within a single evacuation signaling zone, all of the
notification appliances within the zone shall be arranged to activate or deactivate simultaneously, either automatically or
by actuation of a common manual control.
The voice messages and tones shall be synchronized within a notification zone.
Unsynchronized voice messages and tones within the evacuation signaling zone will impact the
intelligibility of the voice messages.
This proposal provides a similar requirement to 18.4.2.5 for synchronization of the standard evacuation signal.
synchronization.
Printed on 1/28/2011
Activating and deactivating multiple notification circuits within a zone is different than
31
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-367 Log #152 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Lynn Nielson, City of Henderson
Add new text to read as follows:
The boundaries of notification zones shall be coincident with a fire area bounded by building outer walls, fire
walls, fire barriers, or fire-resistance rated horizontal assemblies.
For buildings designated as a high-rise building by other codes and standards, alarms shall operate on a
minimum of the floor of incidence, floor below, and floor above the floor of incidence.
These changes are needed to specify what constitutes a notification zone boundary and where
notification appliances are required to operate in a high-rise building.
The TC refers the submitter to the action and statement on Proposal 72-57 (Log #157a).
In regards to proposed 24.4.1.9.5, the TC believes the submitter's text is not the minimum. The text is overly restrictive
and does not account for other building factors.
Printed on 1/28/2011
32
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-367a Log #CP125 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise 24.4.2 to read as follows:
24.4.2* In-Building Mass Notification Systems. The requirements of 24.4.2 shall
apply to mass notification systems installed in buildings or structures for the purpose of notifying and instructing
occupants in an emergency.
There are essentially four tiers of MNSs:
Tier 1
Immediate and intrusive alerting
Sirens, indoor/outdoor loudspeakers
Fire voice evacuation
Electronic signage
Code-compliant system
Tier 2
Personal alerting
Short message service (SMS) text (cell phones)
Computer pop-ups
Tone alert radios
Email broadcast (Internet)
Automated voice dialing and text messaging
Tier 3
Public alerting
Satellite/AM/FM radio broadcasts
Satellite/off-air TV broadcasts
Location-specific messages
Text messages
Tier 4
Locally relevant alerting
Handheld bullhorns
Radio cell phones
Two-way radios
Per ROP discussion, the tiers will be introduced in the preamble to chapter 24, no need to repeat.
72-2010.
No new or modified text was provided. The text indicated to be deleted is not from NFPA
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-368 Log #22 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
John F. Bender, Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
Revise text as follows:
Control units installed as part of a mass notification system shall be in compliance with this Code and
applicable standards such as ANSI/UL 864,
or
ANSI/UL 2017,
.
Add ANSI approval designation to ANSI/UL 2017.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-370 (Log #280).
Printed on 1/28/2011
33
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-369 Log #67 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.1.3 Control units installed as part of a mass notification system shall be in compliance with this Code and either
applicable standards such as ANSI/UL 864, Standard for Control Units and Accessories for Fire Alarm Systems, or UL
2017, Standard for General-Purpose Signaling Devices and Systems.
These 2 standards are industry accepted as the driving documents for listing equipment for this
purpose. SIG-ECS should dictate what standards they are going to accept and delete the term “such as”.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-370 (Log #280)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-370 Log #280 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Joe L. Collins, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.1.3 Control units installed as part of a mass notification system shall be in compliance with this Code and
applicable standards such as ANSI/UL 864,
or UL
2017,
Subject 2572 Outline of Investigation for Control and Communication Units for Mass Notification Systems.
UL Standards 864 and 2017 are not appropriate for Mass Notification Systems. Subject.2572 Outline
of Investigation for Control and Communication Units for Mass Notification Systems is the appropriate standard.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.1.3 Control units installed as part of a mass notification system shall be in compliance with this Code and
applicable standards such as ANSI/UL 864,
or
ANSI/UL 2017,
or ANSI/UL 2572 Control and
Communication Units for Mass Notification Systems.
The TC adds UL 2572 with the knowledge that the document is still in development and
expects completion by the formal adoption of NFPA 72-2013.
It is the intent of the TC to allow the choice of UL standards to be used for MNS.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-371 Log #282 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Bridgett, Naval Facilities Engineering
Relocate to section 24.4.2.14, and change "control units" to "autonomous control units".
Control unit requirements should be collocated in the 24.4.2.14 section. Also, the new term
"autonomous" control unit should be used for consistency.
Relocate text to section 24.3.8 to read as follows:
24.3.8
Control units installed as part of a mass notification system shall be in compliance with this Code and
applicable standards such as ANSI/UL 864,
, or UL
2017,
.
Renumber remaining sections.
The TC notes that the submitter intended to refer to 24.4.2.1.3.
The text relates to more than in-building, it is really for the ACU and ECCU.
Printed on 1/28/2011
34
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-372 Log #307 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Neil Packer, Biamp Systems Corp.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.1.3 Control units installed as part of a mass notification system shall be in compliance with this Code and
applicable relevant standards such as ANSI/UL 864,
or UL 2017,
UL 60065
UL 60950
We propose adding the word ‘relevant’ to circumvent narrow interpretation of this standard as applying
the mentioned standards only, irrespective of their relevance to the equipment in question. Widening the list of
standards mentioned will also aid in the application of standards that are relevant to the equipment. UL60065 is
relevant for amplifiers and other professional audio and audio control equipment likely to form part of a Mass Notification
System. Similarly UL60950 is relevant for information technology components of such systems. Ultimately including
UL2572 would likely also be important.
While we have not proposed it, we suggest also that consideration be given to including listing/certification under
relevant international standards such as EN54-16 Fire Detection and Fire Alarm Systems - Part 16: Voice Alarm Control
and Indicating Equipment.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-370 (Log #280).
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-373 Log #283 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Bridgett, Naval Facilities Engineering
Relocate to section 24.4.2.1.7.
Message priority requirements should be collocated for consistency.
The submission is incomplete. The submitter has not provided a correct section to where to
relocate the text.
The submitter is requested to review and resubmit for the ROC.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-374 Log #284 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Bridgett, Naval Facilities Engineering
Delete section 24.4.2.1.8.
This paragraph is redundant to 24.4.1.7.4 Message priority requirements should be collocated in that
section for consistency.
section on EVACs.
Printed on 1/28/2011
24.4.2.1.8 is not subordinate to 24.4.1. Explanatory material on MNS is not subordinate to the
35
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-375 Log #285 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Bridgett, Naval Facilities Engineering
Delete section 24.4.2.1.9.
This paragraph is redundant to 24.4.1.7.4 Message priority requirements should be collocated in that
section for consistency.
section on EVACs.
24.4.2.1.9 is not subordinate to 24.4.1. Explanatory material on MNS is not subordinate to the
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-376 Log #286 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Bridgett, Naval Facilities Engineering
Delete section 24.4.2.1.10.
This paragraph is redundant to 24.4.1.7.4 Message priority requirements should be collocated in that
section for consistency.
the section on EVACs.
24.4.2.1.10 is not subordinate to 24.4.1. Explanatory material on MNS is not subordinate to
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-377 Log #537 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
John C. Fannin III, SafePlace Corporation
Revise text to read as follows:
****Insert Include 72_L537_R Here****
Proposal intends to relocate the multiple current reference to Risk Analysis into a single new section
24.3.7 to revise the text to clarify requirements and to expand associated explanatory material.
Revise recommendation of proposal as follows:
****Insert Include 72_L537_R.docx here****
****Insert Include LOG # 537_001 (2).pdf here****
The TC accepts the submitter's text with the exception of material extracted and modified from
NFPA 1600. The submitter is requested to resubmit the proposed extracted material without edits.
The TC notes that there is annex material to A.24.7.
The TC does not accept A.24.3.7.7.
The TC questions whether the submitter did really edit the check list or not. See A.24.3.7.7.1.
The submitter is requested to submit publication dates for the added non-NFPA publications.
Printed on 1/28/2011
36
Text to read as follows:
24.3.7* 24.4.2.2 Risk Analysis for Mass Notification Systems.
24.3.7.1* 24.4.2.2.1* Each application of a mass notification system shall be specific to the nature and anticipated
risks of each facility for which it is designed.
24.3.7.2 24.4.2.2.2 The designer shall consider both fire and non-fire emergencies when determining risk tolerances
for survivability for the mass notification system.
24.3.7.3 24.4.2.2.3 Performance-based design and the risk analysis shall be applied in accordance with Section 24.7.
24.3.7.4 24.7.7.1.3 The risk analysis shall consider the number of persons, type of occupancy, and perceived peril to
occupants.
24.3.7.5 24.7.7.2 Number of Persons. The analysis shall be based on the maximum number of people that every
occupied room, building, area, space, campus, or region is expected to contain.
24.3.7.6 24.7.7.3 Occupancy Characteristics.
24.3.7.6.1 24.7.7.3.1 The risk analysis shall consider characteristics of the buildings, areas, spaces, campuses or
regions, equipment, and operations that are not inherent in the design specifications.
24.3.7.6.2 24.7.7.3.2 Those elements that are not inherent in the design specifications, but that affect occupant
behavior or the rate of hazard development, shall be explicitly identified and included in the risk analysis.
24.3.7.7 24.7.7.4 Anticipated Threat. The risk analysis shall consider hazards from natural disasters, accidental
hazards, and human caused events (accidental and intentional). The risk analysis shall consider the following types
of potential events. The list is not all-inclusive but reflects the general categories that shall be considered in the risk
analysis.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Natural Hazards - Geological Events
Natural Hazards - Meteorological Events
Natural Hazards - Biological Events
Human Caused - Accidental Events
Human Caused - Intentional Events
Technological - Caused Events
24.3.7.8 24.7.7.5 Extent of Notification. The risk analysis shall include a review of the extent to which occupants
and personnel are notified, based on the incident anticipated event (potential hazard).
24.3.7.9 24.4.2.2.4 The risk analysis shall be used as the basis for development of the ECS provisions of the facility
emergency response plan.
24.3.8* 24.4.2.3* Emergency Response Plan Elements. A well-defined emergency response plan shall be
developed in accordance with NFPA 1600, Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management
and Business Continuity Programs, and NFPA 1620, Recommended Practice for Pre-Incident Planning, as part of
the design and implementation of a mass notification system.
24.7.7* Risk Analysis. [delete 24.7.7 and add asterisk to the new 24.7 – renumber Annex A material accordingly]
24.7.7.1 General.
Renumber remaining section
Annex A Material
Page 1 of 5
NFPA 72 Log #537 CA A2012 ROP
A.24.3.7* There are many credible risk assessment methodologies that can be utilized and/or referenced in
conducting the risk assessment required in 24.3.7, some of which are listed below:
CARVER - Target Analysis and Vulnerability Assessment Methodology, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Defense - (See Field Manual 34-36 Special Operation Forces Intelligence and Electronics Warfare Operation, Sept.
30, 1991), www.defense.gov
General Security Risk Assessment Guidelines. Alexandria, VA:
American Society for Industrial Security International, www.asisonline.org
NFPA 1600, Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management and Business Continuity Programs, Quincy, MA:
National Fire Protection Association, www.nfpa.org
NFPA 730, Guide to Premises Security, Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association, www.nfpa.org
Responsible Care Code, Washington, DC: American Chemistry Council, www.americanchemistry.com
Risk and Resilience Management of Water & Wastewater Systems, Denver, CO: American Water Works
Association, www.awwa.org
VAMCAP® Vulnerability Assessment Methodology for Critical Asset Protection, Wilmington, DE: SafePlace
Corporation, www.safeplace.com
Vulnerability Assessment Methodologies, Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories, www.sandia.gov
A. 24.3.7.1 24.4.2.2.1 Although this chapter outlines some specific criteria and/or limitations, each application
should be based on recognized performance-based design practices and the emergency response plan developed for
the specific facility. Refer also to the risk analysis information found in 24.3.7 7.7.
Here are the general categories of questions that might be presented to the senior manager responsible for mass
notification decisions. The actual questions for each project must be tailored to the area, the building, the campus,
and the culture of the user organization. Following is a brief description of potential content within the mass
notification event questions:
(1) What is the type of emergency event—that is, is it fire, security, safety, health, environmental, geological,
meteorological, utility service disruption, or another type of event?
(2) What is the urgency of the emergency event — that is, does it represent immediate danger, has it already
occurred, is it expected to occur soon, is it expected to occur in the future, or is its occurrence unknown?
(3) What is the anticipated or expected severity of the emergency event that is, how will it impact our facility and its
functions, is it expected to be extreme, severe, etc.?
(4) What is the certainty of the emergency event that is, is it happening now, is it very likely to occur, is it likely to
occur, is it possible that it will occur in the future, is it unlikely to occur, or is its occurrence unknown?
(5) What is the location of the event, or from what direction is the emergency event approaching, that is, has it or
will it be approaching from the north, south, east, or west?
(6) What zone or areas should receive the emergency message(s),—that is, is it a floor of a building, multiple floors
of a building, the entire building, multiple buildings, a campus of buildings, an entire town or city, an entire state, an
entire region of states, or an entire country?
(7) What is the validity of the emergency event,—that is, has the emergency event been investigated and/or
confirmed?
(8) What instructions should we send to our personnel —that is, should they evacuate the facility, should they
shelter-in-place, should they shelter-in-place at a special location, should they proceed to a safe haven area, and
other action oriented items?
(9) Are there any special instructions, procedures, or special tasks that we need to remind personnel about or to
accomplish — that is, close your office door, open your office door, stay away from windows, do not use elevators,
and other information relating to personnel actions?
Page 2 of 5
NFPA 72 Log #537 CA A2012 ROP
The questions suggested in items (1) through (9) are offered for consideration, and not all of them might be
appropriate for every mass notification system installation. It is important to remember that when an emergency
event occurs, the response must be immediate and deliberate. Therefore, there is no time for indecision. So the
questions selected to reside in the emergency messaging decision tree illustrated in items (1) through (9) must be
straightforward and as simple as possible. They must also be tailored to the specific organization, culture, site, and
unique requirements of each local environment.
A24.3.7.7* [extracted in its entirety from NFPA 1600-2010 with edits]
The risk analysis should include the types of potential events that follow in items (1) through (3). This list is not all-inclusive but
reflects the general categories that should be assessed in the hazard identification.
(1) Naturally occurring hazards that can occur without human influence and have potential direct or indirect impact on the entity
(people, property, environment), such as the following:
(a)Geological hazards (not including asteroids, comets, meteors), as follows:
i. Earthquake
ii. Tsunami
iii. Volcano
iv. Landslide, mudslide, subsidence
v. Glacier, iceberg
(b) Meteorological hazards, as follows:
i. Flood, flash flood, seiche, tidal surge
ii. Drought
iii. Fire (forest, range, urban, wildland, urban interface)
iv. Snow, ice, hail, sleet, avalanche
v. Windstorm, tropical cyclone, hurricane, tornado, water spout, dust storm or sandstorm
vi. Extreme temperatures (heat, cold)
vii. Lightning strikes
viii. Famine
ix. Geomagnetic storm
(c) Biological hazards, as follows:
i. Emerging diseases that impact humans or animals [plague, smallpox, anthrax, West Nile virus, foot and mouth
disease, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), pandemic disease, bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, or
mad cow disease)]
ii. Animal or insect infestation or damage
(2) Human-caused events, such as the following:
(a) Accidental hazards, as follows:
i. Hazardous material (explosive, flammable liquid, flammable gas, flammable solid, oxidizer, poison, radiological,
corrosive) spill or release
ii. Explosion/fire
iii. Transportation accident
iv. Building/structure collapse
v. Energy/power/utility failure
vi. Fuel/resource shortage
vii. Air/water pollution, contamination
viii. Water control structure/dam/levee failure
ix. Financial issues, economic depression, inflation, financial system collapse
x. Communications systems interruptions
xi. Misinformation
(b) Intentional hazards, as follows:
i. Terrorism (explosive, chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, cyber)
ii. Sabotage
iii. Civil disturbance, public unrest, mass hysteria, riot
iv. Enemy attack, war
v. Insurrection
Page 3 of 5
NFPA 72 Log #537 CA A2012 ROP
vi. Strike or labor dispute
vii. Disinformation
viii. Criminal activity (vandalism, arson, theft, fraud, embezzlement, data theft)
ix. Electromagnetic pulse
x. Physical or information security breach
xi. Workplace/school/university violence
xii. Product defect or contamination
xiii. Harassment
xiv. Discrimination
(3) Technologically caused events that can be unrelated to natural or human-caused events, such as the following:
(a) Central computer, mainframe, server, software, or application (internal/external) hazards
(b) Ancillary support equipment hazards
(c) Telecommunications hazards
(d) Energy/power/utility hazards
A. 24.3.8 24.4.2.3 The emergency response plan should include, but not be limited to, the following elements:
(1) Emergency response team structure
(2) Emergency response procedures, as follows:
(a) Building system related emergencies
(b) Human-related emergencies
(c) Terrorism-related emergencies
(d) Weather-related emergencies
(3) Emergency response equipment and operations
(4) Emergency response notification, as follows:
(a) Emergency message content
(b) Emergency notification approval process
(c) Emergency notification initiation process
(5) Emergency response training and drills, as follows:
(a) Classroom training
(b) Table-top training
(c) Live drills
A.24.7 24.7.7 The risk analysis forms the basis for the emergency response plan.
24.7* Performance-Based Design of Mass Notification Systems.
[24.7 in NFPA 72-2010 has an asterisk but there does not appear to be any annex material?]
24.7.7.1.1 The design of the mass notification system shall be based upon a risk analysis prepared in accordance
with 24.7 specific to the nature and anticipated risks of each facility for which it is designed.
24.7.7.1.2 The design of the mass notification system shall include the preparation of a design brief that is prepared
utilizing recognized performance-based design practices.
24.7.7.6 Operational Status and System Effectiveness. The performance of the system shall reflect the
documented performance and reliability of the components of those systems or features, unless design specifications
are incorporated to modify the expected performance.
24.7.7.6.1 Staff Assistance. The inclusion of trained employees as part of the mass notification system shall be
identified and documented.
24.7.7.6.2 Emergency Response Personnel. The design shall consider the characteristics or other conditions related
to the availability, speed of response, effectiveness, roles, and other characteristics of emergency response
personnel.
Page 4 of 5
NFPA 72 Log #537 CA A2012 ROP
A.24.3.7.7.1 Risk Analysis Checklist [All new material extracted in its entirety from NFPA 1600-2010 with edits]
****Insert Artwork Here****
Risk Analysis Checklist
Page 5 of 5
NFPA 72 Log #537 CA A2012 ROP
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-378 Log #68 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.4.2* Where identified by the risk analysis emergency response plan, the mass notification system shall provide
the capability for authorized personnel to remotely activate live and prerecorded emergency messages.
By definition the emergency response plan would be used to dictate how the equipment would be
utilized to complement the responders.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.4.2* Where identified required by the risk analysis emergency response plan, the mass notification system shall
provide the capability for authorized personnel to remotely activate live and prerecorded emergency messages.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and changes "identified" to "required".
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-378a Log #CP115 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise 24.4.2.4.9 to read as follows:
24.4.2.4.9* During the period after the mass notification system has seized control of the audible and visual notification
appliances, but before the mass notification system relinquishes control, the mass notification system shall activate the
an audible and visual visible signal shall be actuated by notification appliances at least once every 30 seconds.
The TC adds “visual” for consistency, and then adds “mass notification system” to clarify which control
unit must activate the appliances.
Per the Annex material, the intent of this requirement is to provide some sort of signal to the building occupants that
have been instructed to stay in place/relocate so that they have some comfort knowing that the MNS is still operational
rather than hearing nothing but silence. MNS events can be lengthy in duration and are also dynamic. If the MNS
provides a “silent period” then it must activate briefly every 30 seconds. The MNS can also provide an intermittent or
running loop of the current message, which meets the intent of this requirement.
Printed on 1/28/2011
37
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-379 Log #128 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Bruce Fraser, Fraser Fire Protection Services
Add the following text and renumber the subsequent paragraphs and Annex material:
24.4.2.5 Notification Coverage.
24.4.2.5.1 Voice messages shall comply with the requirements of 24.3.1.
24.4.2.5.1.1 The following requirements shall be met for layout and design:
(1) The speaker layout of the system shall be designed to ensure intelligibility and audibility.
(2) Intelligibility shall first be determined by ensuring that all areas in the building have the required level of audibility.
(3) The design shall incorporate speaker placement to provide intelligibility.
24.4.2.5.1.2* System design shall incorporate designation of acoustically distinguishable spaces (ADS) within the
occupied areas as required in Chapter 18.
24.4.2.5.1.3 Audibility shall be required in all areas in accordance with Chapter 18.
24.4.2.5.1.4 Unless specifically required by the authority having jurisdiction, intelligibility shall not be required in the
following locations:
(1) Private bathrooms, shower rooms, saunas and similar rooms/areas
(2)Mechanical/electrical/elevator equipment rooms
(3) Elevator cars
(4) Individual offices
(5) Kitchens
(6) Storage rooms
(7) Closets
(8) Rooms/areas where intelligibility cannot reasonably be predicted
To clarify the coverage pertains to notification requirements.
To provide a requirement and expectation for audibility and intelligibility for In-building MNS which are similar to those
of fire EVACS.
There should be the same requirements for both emergency communications systems while still allowing for flexibility
in the risk analysis.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-360 (Log #598).
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-380 Log #342 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Scott Lacey, Lacey Fire Protection Engineering
Add text to read as follows:
Security for mass notification systems documentation shall be determined by the stakeholders. It
is recognized that there are circumstances in which the security and protection of system documents may require
measures other than as prescribed in Section 24.4.2.7. Where such conditions have been identified, the stakeholders
shall clearly identify what and how system documents shall be maintained to satisfy the integrity of this section.
Because a common expectation of MNS is to function during security and/or terrorist events, it may be
critical that system design be protected. The new language is intended to reinforce this deviation from previous
practice as necessary.
Add text to read as follows:
Security for mass notification systems documentation shall be determined by the stakeholders.
A.24.4.2.7.1 It is recognized that there are circumstances in which the security and protection of system documents
could require measures other than as prescribed in Section 24.4.2.7. Where such conditions have been identified, the
stakeholders should clearly identify what and how system documents should be maintained to satisfy the integrity of this
section.
The TC accepts the submitter's text but more appropriately relocates it to A.24.4.2.7.1.
Printed on 1/28/2011
38
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-381 Log #336 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Scott Lacey, Lacey Fire Protection Engineering
Add a new paragraph starting under section 24.4.2.7 Documentation. Renumber subsequent
paragraphs.
Design documents containing at minimum specifications, shop drawings, input/output matrix,
battery calculations, notification appliance voltage drop calculations for strobes and speakers, and product cut-sheets
shall be prepared prior to installation of any new system. Systems that are altered shall have design documents
prepared applicable to the portions of the system that are altered. Documents shall be revised as necessary following
installation to represent as-built conditions and include record drawings.
Currently there is no requirement within 72 for design documents to be prepared before installation.
Only that they be submitted to the AHJ if the AHJ requests them. If the AHJ does not request them then the contractor
can install the system without preparing any design documents or calculations. Also provides clarification with respect
to as-built and record drawings to be revised versions of shop drawings. Similar changes are proposed to Section
10.18.
Add a new paragraph to read as follows:
Design documents shall be prepared prior to installation of any new system.
A.24.3.7 The design documents might include but are not be limited to: shop drawings, input/output matrix, battery
calculations, notification appliance voltage drop calculations for strobes and speakers, and product data sheets.
24.3.7.1 Systems that are altered shall have design documents prepared applicable to the portions of the system that
are altered.
24.3.7.2 Documents shall be revised as necessary following installation to represent as-built conditions and include
record drawings.
The TC accepts the submitter's text but more appropriately relocates it to new 24.3.7. The TC
edits the sections to comply with the MOS.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-382 Log #337 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Scott Lacey, Lacey Fire Protection Engineering
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.7.2.1 A record of completion form, as similar to that shown in Figure 10.18.2.1.1, shall be required for
documentation of the mass notification system. A customized form developed around the particular system which
contains applicable information may be used. The form is not required to contain information or items that are not
applicable to the particular system.
The current language implies that Figure 10.18.2.1.1 is required to be used. New language clarifies
that the figure is a guide for intended information and not necessarily the only option. Concept of form use is indicated
on the top of the form, but not in the code body.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.7.2.1* A record of completion form, as similar to that shown in Figure 10.18.2.1.1, shall be required for
documentation of the mass notification system.
A.24.4.2.7.2.1 A customized form developed around the particular system which contains applicable information might
be used. The form shall not be required to contain information or items that are not applicable to the particular system.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and relocates text to A.24.4.2.7.2.1.
Printed on 1/28/2011
39
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-383 Log #338 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Scott Lacey, Lacey Fire Protection Engineering
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.7.2.2 All systems that are modified after the initial installation shall have the original, or latest overall system,
record of completion revised or attached to show all changes from the original information and shall be identified with a
revision date.
24.4.2.7.2.3* Where the original, or the latest overall system, record of completion can not be obtained, a new overall
system record of completion shall be provided that documents the system configuration as discovered during the current
projects scope of work.
A.24.4.2.7.2.3 It is the intent that if an original or current record of completion is not available for the overall system, the
installer will provide a new record of completion that addresses items discovered about the system. The installer will
complete the respective sections related to the overall system that have been discovered under the current scope of
work. It is not the intent of this section to require an in-depth evaluation of an existing system solely for the purpose of
completing a system-wide record of completion.
Current language assumes that there is always an existing record of completion available, when in
fact, it is seldom available. In addition the current language provides no alternatives. The proposed language is
intended to provide direction towards the intent when no existing documentation is available. Coordinate with proposal
for 10.18.2.2.3.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-384 Log #69 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.7.3 Required Documentation. Every system shall include the following documentation, which shall be delivered
to the owner or the owner’s representative upon final acceptance of the system:
(1) An owner’s manual including a complete set of operations and maintenance manuals, manufacturer’s published
instructions, and product data sheets covering all system equipment
(2) Record and as-built drawings
(3) One current copy of the record of completion form, updated to reflect all system additions or modifications
(4) For software-based systems, a record copy of the system specific software
(5) A copy of the site-specific software shall be stored on-site in non-volatile, non-erasable, non-rewritable memory.
(56) Emergency response plan, with operational management procedures defined for management and activation of
the system
Language added to ensure that the actual site specific software is stored on site. It could be argued
that a record copy would just be the details of the software, ladder logic equations etc. and not the actual site specific
software. The added language clarifies that the site specific software must reside on site.
Printed on 1/28/2011
40
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-385 Log #341 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Scott Lacey, Lacey Fire Protection Engineering
Add text to read as follows:
Every system shall include the following documentation, which shall be delivered
to the owner or the owner’s representative upon final acceptance of the system:
(1) An owner’s manual including a complete set of operations and maintenance manuals, manufacturer’s published
instructions, and product data sheets covering all system equipment
(2) Record and as-built drawings
(3) A written sequence of operation
(3) (4) One current copy of the record of completion form, updated to reflect all system additions or modifications
(4) (5) For software-based systems, a record copy of the system specific software
(5) (6) Emergency response plan, with operational management procedures defined for management and activation of
the system
(7) The risk analysis, when provided
A written sequence of operation is added to coordinate with criteria of 10.18. Risk analysis is added
due to its nature and basis of the mass notification system design.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-386 Log #334 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Scott Lacey, Lacey Fire Protection Engineering
Add text to read as follows:
24.4.2.7.4 Risk Assessment Documentation
24.4.2.7.4.1 When a risk assessment is required to be prepared, such as for a mass notification system, findings of the
risk assessment shall be documented.
24.4.2.7.4.2 When identified by the stakeholders, security and protection of the risk assessment shall be in accordance
with 8.2.1.
8.4.7.3 The risk assessment shall identify the various scenarios evaluated, and the anticipated outcomes.
24.4.2.7.4.1 The stakeholders shall identify the worthiness of a respective scenario and shall identify if the scenario
and outcome shall be included in documentation.
To provide documentation criteria for Risk Assessments. Coordinate with proposal for new
Documentation chapter.
Add text to read as follows:
24.4.2.7.4 Risk Assessment Analysis Documentation
24.4.2.7.4.1 When a risk assessment analysis is required to be prepared, such as for a mass notification system,
findings of the risk assessment shall be documented.
24.4.2.7.4.2 When identified by the stakeholders, security and protection of the risk assessment analysis shall be in
accordance with 8.2.1 24.4.2.7.1.
Renumber remaining sections.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and changes "assessment" to "analysis".
The TC notes this text is to be new 24.4.2.7.4 and the remaining sections are to be renumbered.
The submitter's "8.2.1" is changed to "24.4.2.7.1".
The TC does not accept the submitter's 8.4.7.3 and 24.4.2.7.4.1.
Printed on 1/28/2011
41
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-387 Log #70 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.9 Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance Requirements. Mass notification systems shall be inspected, tested,
and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's published instructions requirements and the inspection, testing,
and maintenance requirements of Chapter 14.
Language modified to point the reader to use manufacturers published instructions. The term
requirements is subjective and not published readily by many manufacturers.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-387a Log #599 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Thomas P. Hammerberg, Automatic Fire Alarm Association, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.10* System Response Priorities. Priority levels shall be established on the basis of the risk analysis.
This clarifies the operation of the system's outputs bases on the input stimulus provided during
emergency conditions.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-388 Log #74 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.11 Initiation Indication. The source of system activation shall be visibly and audibly indicated at the central
control station and at the building control unit, unless otherwise determined by the risk analysis emergency response
plan.
The emergency response plan is used to determine how a system is to be used during an event. Using
the risk analysis in this context is not correct.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.11 Initiation Indication. The source of system activation shall be visibly and audibly indicated at the central
control station and at the building control unit, unless otherwise determined required by the risk analysis emergency
response plan.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and changes "determined" to "required".
Printed on 1/28/2011
42
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-389 Log #415 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Paul E. Macknis, Naval Facilities Engineering Command SW
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.11 Initiation Indication. The source of system activation shall be visibly and audibly indicated at the central
control station and at the building control unit, unless otherwise determined by the risk analysis.
Exception: Unless otherwise determined by the risk analysis.
Revised text separates the exception from a requirement for better clarity.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-388 (Log #74).
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-390 Log #75 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.12.1 Devices connected to a mass notification system for the purpose of initiating an automatic response to an
emergency shall be evaluated based on the risk analysis emergency response plan.
The emergency response plan is used to determine how a system is to be used during an event. Using
the risk analysis in this context is not correct.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-391 Log #86 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.12.4 Non-fire emergency manual actuating stations (boxes) shall be listed with an applicable standard, such as
to ANSI/UL 2017, Standard for General Purpose Signaling Devices and Systems.
UL 2017 standard is the standard that non-fire emergency manual actuating stations (boxes) are listed
to. SIG-ECS should state that it is the overriding document for these devices and not accept anything less. AHJs and
Engineers need guidance in listing of equipment for ECS use. SIG-ECS should provide that guidance directly and
remove the wording “such as”.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-392 Log #287 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Bridgett, Naval Facilities Engineering
Revise text as follows:
Where identified by the risk analysis, building occupants meeting the requirement of 24.4.2.4.1 shall be permitted to
initiate communications from the ACU.
Building occupants will not always be intended to operate the ACU. Access is only intended for
authorized personnel and only when addressed in the risk analysis. This also aligns this section with 24.4.2.4.2 and
24.7.7.6.1.
The TC believes that the section refers to the original clause that contains the annex material.
Authorized personnel is contained in the annex material.
Printed on 1/28/2011
43
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-393 Log #414 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Paul E. Macknis, Naval Facilities Engineering Command SW
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.14.2 Building occupants meeting the requirements 24.4.2.4.1 as determined by the risk analysis and as defined
in the emergency response plan shall be permitted to initiate communications from the ACU.
Removed the reference to requirements in section 24.4.2.4.1 and inserted text instead because the
referenced text did not have a requirement. So I suggest either add the requirement to the referenced text or edit this
text with the requirement.
The TC believes that the section refers to the original clause that contains the annex material.
Authorized personnel is contained in the annex material.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-394 Log #413 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Paul E. Macknis, Naval Facilities Engineering Command SW
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.14.3 Unless otherwise identified through the risk analysis in 24.4.2.10, actions taken at the building ACU shall
take precedence over actions taken at any location, including the local operating console, or inputs from a wide-area
mass notification system.
This section deals with system priorities so I referenced the section on system priorities.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.14.3 Unless otherwise identified through the risk analysis in 24.4.2.10, in the emergency response plan, actions
taken at the building ACU shall take precedence over actions taken at any location, including the local operating
console, or inputs from a wide-area mass notification system.
The TC notes that the submitter did not quote 24.4.2.14.3 correctly.
The TC sees no need to require reference to 24.4.2.10.
The TC edits the text to refer to the emergency response plan for consistency.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-395 Log #118 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Bridgett, Naval Facilities Engineering
Revise text as follows:
Where identified by the risk analysis, building occupants meeting the authorized personnel requirement of 24.4.2.4.1
shall be permitted to initiate communications from the LOC.
Building occupants will not always be intended to operate the LOC. Access is only intended for
authorized personnel and only when addressed in the risk analysis. This also aligns this section with 24.4.2.4.2 and
24.7.7.6.1.
The TC believes that the section refers to the original clause that contains the annex material.
Authorized personnel is contained in the annex material.
Printed on 1/28/2011
44
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-396 Log #119 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Bridgett, Naval Facilities Engineering
Revise text as follows:
The location having control of the system shall be identified by a visible indication at that location and at the ACU.
Multiple control locations may cause confusion, especially when control cannot be gained at one
location due to it being held at another location. Requiring visible indication of the control location at the ACU will give
users information that will reduce confusion.
The submitter has not provided technical substantiation for this change.
The TC does not agree with the proposed text. This will overly complicate the system operation for a minimum Code.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-396a Log #CP113 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise 24.4.2.15.6 to read as follows:
24.4.2.15.6 Upon initiation of an emergency message, a visible indication shall be provided to the user that the LOC is
connected to the audio network. Manual controls shall be arranged to provide visible indication of the on/off status for
their associated notification signaling zone.
The need to identify each and every notification zone at the LOC is above and beyond the intent of an
LOC. This functionality pertains to an ACU, not the LOC so the original text is stricken. The new text requires a simple
visual indication to the operator that when they attempt to provide a message, they would know that they are connected
to the audio network and the LOC is ready for paging.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-397 Log #85 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Add new text to read as follows:
24.4.2.15.7.1* When live voice instructions are completed and the microphone is released, the previously initiated
signals shall not automatically resume unless specified in the emergency response plan.
A.24.4.2.15.7.1 Voice communications systems have the option of resuming previously initiated recorded instructions
when the microphone is released. The emergency response plan should dictate what happens once the microphone is
released. Typically the recorded message should not be played after live voice instructions are broadcast. This will
ensure that mixed signals from live and recorded messages do not conflict.
It is not uncommon for fire alarm voice communications systems to be programmed to revert back to
the recorded messages once a microphone has been keyed and released. Now with the addition of MNS it is important
that someone review this process to ensure mixed signals are not being sent to the occupants.
The submitter's concern is already addressed in 24.4.2.16.6.
Printed on 1/28/2011
45
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-397a Log #CP114 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Add new text to read as follows:
24.4.2.15.8 The emergency message shall be of an all-call basis.
Based upon the TC discussion, at a minimum, the LOC should be an all-call type function. If an
owner/designer elects to provide more than that, it would be acceptable.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-398 Log #84 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.16.1* The priority of mass notification messages shall be established using risk analysis methods the
emergency response plan.
The risk analysis is not used to conduct the way message notification will be used. The reader should
be pointed to the emergency response plan. Based on how the responders need to communicate to the occupants using
the emergency response plan should be how message priority is achieved.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-399 Log #412 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Paul E. Macknis, Naval Facilities Engineering Command SW
Add text to read as follows:
24.4.2.16.1* The priority of mass notification messages shall be established using risk analysis methods and shall be
identified in the emergency response plan.
Added text for clarity and to remove two redundant sections below, 24.4.2.16.3 and 24.4.2.16.4.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-398 (Log #84).
Printed on 1/28/2011
46
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-400 Log #83 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.16.2 The local building mass notification system shall have the ability to override the fire alarm system with live
voice or manual activation of a high priority message, but only where that message and operation are approved under
the risk analysis criteria emergency response plan.
The risk analysis is not used to conduct the way message notification will be used. The reader should
be pointed to the emergency response plan. Based on how the responders need to communicate to the occupants using
the emergency response plan should be how message priority is achieved.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.16.2 The local building mass notification system shall have the ability to override the fire alarm system with live
voice or manual activation of a higher priority message, but only where that message and operation are approved under
the risk analysis criteria emergency response plan.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and changes "high" to "higher".
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-401 Log #82 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.16.3 All other messages shall also be prioritized by using the risk analysis method emergency response plan.
The risk analysis is not used to conduct the way message notification will be used. The reader should
be pointed to the emergency response plan. Based on how the responders need to communicate to the occupants using
the emergency response plan should be how message priority is achieved.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-402 Log #411 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Paul E. Macknis, Naval Facilities Engineering Command SW
Remove section 24.4.2.16.3.
This section is redundant. The text contained in it also located in section 24.4.2.16.1.
The TC does not see the text as redundant.
Printed on 1/28/2011
47
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-403 Log #81 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.16.4 When identified by the risk analysis and emergency response plan, messages from the mass notification
system shall take priority over fire alarm messages and signals.
The risk analysis is not used to conduct the way message notification will be used. The reader should
be pointed to the emergency response plan. Based on how the responders need to communicate to the occupants using
the emergency response plan should be how message priority is achieved.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-404 (Log #129).
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-404 Log #129 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Bruce Fraser, Fraser Fire Protection Services
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.16.4 When identified by the risk analysis and emergency response plan, messages from the mass notification
system shall be permitted to take priority over fire alarm messages and signals.
To more accurately describe the intent.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.16.4 When identified by the risk analysis and emergency response plan, messages from the mass notification
system shall be permitted to take priority over fire alarm messages and signals.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and deletes "risk analysis and".
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-405 Log #410 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Paul E. Macknis, Naval Facilities Engineering Command SW
Remove section 24.4.2.16.4.
This section is redundant. The text contained in this section is already in section 24.4.2.16.1.
The TC does not see the text as redundant.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-406 Log #130 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Bruce Fraser, Fraser Fire Protection Services
Reword the following:
24.4.2.16.5 If the fire alarm system is in the alarm mode and a recorded voice message is playing, or the audible
signals are sounding, and then the mass notification system is actuated, it shall cause deactivation of all fire
alarm–initiated audible and visible notification appliances, unless they have also been designated for mass notification
use.
Rewording for clarity. Deactivation of fire alarm notification would cease regardless of the appliances.
Printed on 1/28/2011
48
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-407 Log #397 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
Deactivation of fire alarm audible and visible notification signals shall cause an individually identified
supervisory signal to be initiated at the building each affected fire alarm control unit for each affected fire alarm control
unit.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
Clarifies requirement by removing the repetition of fire alarm control unit.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-407a Log #600 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Thomas P. Hammerberg, Automatic Fire Alarm Association, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.16.7 Deactivation of fire alarm audible and visible notification signals shall cause an individually identified
supervisory signal to be initiated at the building fire alarm control unit for each affected fire alarm control unit
This could be a led on the display of an annunciator. Properly labeled to identify the audible and visual
signals of the fire control panel have been overridden by the mass notification life safety event
Should the MNS impair the fire alarm system, by definition, the signal is a supervisory signal.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-408 Log #396 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
The fire alarm signal deactivation function shall be permitted to occur only when both the fire alarm system
is in an alarm condition and a voice message notification is initiated being given by the mass notification system.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
A mass notification system will need to deactivate additional notification appliances such as strobes if they are used
only for fire alarm notification to prevent conflicting information to the hearing impaired. This proposal clarifies the
requirement to include notification methods in addition to a voice message.
Printed on 1/28/2011
49
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-409 Log #394 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
Local controls shall be permitted to adjust volume levels of ancillary functions non-emergency signals such
as, but not limited to, background music and building paging.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
This proposal clarifies the requirement by referring to the Ancillary Functions (3.3.15) that was defined by SIG-ECS
during the previous revision cycle.
3.3.15 Ancillary Functions. Ancillary functions are those nonemergency activations of the fire alarm or mass notification
audible, visual, and textual output circuits allowed. Ancillary functions can include general paging, background music, or
other non-emergency signals. (SIG-ECS)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-410 Log #308 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Neil Packer, Biamp Systems Corp.
Revise text to read as follows:
Where audible notification is provided, mass notification systems shall also provide visible notification
information to serve the hearing impaired and for high-noise areas.
The visible notification required by 24.4.2.19.1 shall be accomplished either by using strobes. or by using
textual, graphic, or video displays or by using a combination of strobes and textual, graphic, or video displays.
In addition to the strobes required by 24.4.2.19.1, textual, graphic, or video displays shall be permitted.
We propose making textual, graphic or video displays an alternative to strobes and allowing also for a
combination of strobes and graphic/text based delivery. By their nature, strobes deliver only a generalized warning and
likely a poor one because flashing lights are commonly used to warn of a variety of hazards. For instance, in airports
people movers for transporting handicapped and aged passengers have flashing lights. These do not constitute the
same potential level of threat as say, terrorism, yet the means of warning to hearing impaired is the same. Rich-content
signage systems are now readily available and in common use. These deliver more focused and effective messages to
the hearing impaired. We contend that such systems should at least equal status with strobes within NFPA72 for
delivery of in a mass notification messages.
The submitter has not provided sufficient technical substantiation. Presently,there are no
requirements for the quantity, size, etc. for textual, graphic, or video displays and the distribution of these with strobes.
Printed on 1/28/2011
50
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-411 Log #401 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
Where strobes are used as visible Visible appliances, they shall meet the requirements of Sections 18.5 or
18.6, as appropriate Chapter 18.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
The chapter should be referenced instead of 18.5 and 18.6 because the general requirements in 18.3 will also apply.
This proposal clarifies that the general requirements will also apply.
Revise text to read as follows:
Where strobes are used as visible Visible appliances, they shall meet the requirements of Sections 18.5 or
18.6, as appropriate Chapter 18.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and also deletes "18.5 or 18.6, as appropriate".
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-412 Log #353 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Peter Binkley, Evax Systems, Inc.
Delete the following text
Visible notification appliances shall be of a sufficient quantity and intensity and located so as to meet the intent of the
design and be in compliance with Section 18.5.
Previous section, 24.4.2.20.1, already mandates compliance with 18.5. Restating is redundant and
unecessary.
The two sections are not redundant. 24.4.2.20.1 provides the appliance requirements
whereas 24.4.2.20.2 provides the design requirements such as quantity and location.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-413 Log #354 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Peter Binkley, Evax Systems, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
Strobes used in combination systems where the same strobe is used for both mass notification and fire
notification shall comply with the following:
(1) Be clear or nominal white, meeting the listing requirements of ANSI/UL 1971,
(2) Have no marking or be marked with the word “ALERT” stamped or imprinted on the appliance
(3) Be visible to the public
Compliance to 18.5 has already been established. Deleted text is redundant.
requirements.
Printed on 1/28/2011
The submitter has not provided technical substantiation to justify this relaxation of
51
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-414 Log #355 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Peter Binkley, Evax Systems, Inc.
Delete text as follows:
Strobes used in combination systems where the same strobe is used for both mass notification and fire
notification shall be clear or nominal white, meeting the listing requirements of ANSI/UL 1971,
.
Section is redundant to 24.4.2.20.4.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-415 Log #356 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Peter Binkley, Evax Systems, Inc.
Delete the following text:
The intensity of strobes shall meet the requirements of Chapter 18.
Compliance to 18.5 has already been established. Deleted text is redundant.
Printed on 1/28/2011
52
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-416 Log #80 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.20.9 Strobes used for mass notification shall be listed to either an applicable standard such as ANSI/UL 1971,
or ANSI/UL 1638,
UL 1971 and 1638 are the governing standards for strobes used for fire alarm or for general signaling.
SIG-ECS should direct the user to the applicable standards and remove wording “such as”.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.20.1 Where strobes are used as visible appliances, they shall meet the requirements of Sections 18.5 or 18.6,
as appropriate. 24.4.2.20.2 through 24.4.2.20.10.
24.4.2.20.2 Visible notification appliances shall be of a sufficient quantity and intensity and located so as to meet the
intent of the design and be in compliance with Section 18.5.
24.4.2.20.3 The word “ALERT” shall be stamped or imprinted on the appliance and be visible to the public. [Relocate
to 24.4.2.20.9 and renumber remaining paragraphs accordingly] 24.4.2.20. 4 3 Strobes used in combination systems where the same strobe is used for both mass notification and fire
notification shall comply with the following:
(1) Be clear or nominal white, meeting the listing requirements of ANSI/UL 1971,
(2) Have no marking or be marked with the word “ALERT” stamped or imprinted on the appliance
(3) Be visible to the public
24.4.2.20.5 4 In situations where existing notification appliances previously used exclusively for fire alarm applications,
and are marked with the word “FIRE,” and are to be used for other emergency notification purposes, field modification to
the marking shall be permitted, provided that it is accomplished by one of the following methods:
(1) Replacement of the manufacturer’s approved escutcheon or trim plate
(2) Covering of, or removal of, the word “FIRE” using a manufacturer’s approved method
(3) Installation of a permanent sign directly adjacent or below the notification appliance indicating that it is multipurpose
and will operate for fire and other emergency conditions
24.4.2.20.6 Strobes used in combination systems where the same strobe is used for both mass notification and fire
notification shall be clear or nominal white, meeting the listing requirements ofANSI/UL 1971,
24.4.2.20.76 Strobes with colored lenses shall be marked with the listed effective intensity using the lens color
installed.
24.4.2.20.87 The intensity of strobes shall meet the requirements of Chapter 18. The spacing of colored strobes shall
be in accordance with public mode spacing requirements of 18.5 using the effective intensity as the basis for spacing.
24.4.2.20.3 8 Where strobes are used solely for mass notification, Tthe word “ALERT” shall be stamped or imprinted
on the appliance and be visible to the public.
24.4.2.20.9 Strobes Where colored strobes are used solely for mass notification they shall be listed to an applicable
standard such as ANSI/UL 1638, Visual Signaling Appliances - Private Mode Emergency and General Utility Signaling.
ANSI/UL 1971, Standard for Signaling Devices for the Hearing Impaired.
24.4.2.20.10 Strobe appliances listed to ANSI/UL 1971,
, shall
be considered as meeting the intent of this Code.
Exception: Color lens strobes shall meet the requirements of 24.4.2.20.9.
24.4.2.20.1011 Strobes used for mass notification shall meet the synchronization requirements of Section 18.5.
The TC identified a conflict in allowing colored strobes while requiring these strobes to meet
UL 1971. UL 1971 requires the use of clear/nominal white strobes and thus cannot be used for colored lenses. As
such, several paragraphs were revised for correlation and intent of spacing.
24.4.2.20.6 for combination systems is a duplicate of 24.4.2.20.4.(1).
Printed on 1/28/2011
53
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-417 Log #357 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Peter Binkley, Evax Systems, Inc.
Delete the following text:
24.4.2.20.9 Strobes used for mass notification shall be listed to an applicable standard such as ANSI/UL 1971,
Standard for Signaling Devices for the Hearing Impaired.
Compliance to 18.5 has already been established. 18.5 requires compliance to ANSI/UL 1971, deleted
text is redundant.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-416 (Log #80).
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-418 Log #358 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Peter Binkley, Evax Systems, Inc.
Delete text as follows:
24.4.2.20.10 Strobes used for mass notification shall meet the synchronization requirements of Section 18.5.
Compliance to 18.5 has already been established. 18.5 requires synchronization, deleted text is
redundant.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-416 (Log #80).
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-419 Log #393 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Delete the following text:
Textual visible appliances within buildings shall meet the power supply requirements specific to protected
premises fire alarm systems in 10.17.3.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
The proceeding section, 24.4.2.21.8 refers to section 10.5, and section 10.5.8.1 refers to 10.17.3. Where 10.5.8.1
provides a reference to 10.17.3 it is not necessary to provide section 24.4.2.21.7.
The TC chooses to not reduce the requirements of 24.4.2.21.7 with reference to 10.17.3.
Printed on 1/28/2011
54
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-420 Log #404 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Move paragraph 24.4.2.21.9: All mass notification system notification appliances that receive their
power from a signaling line circuit of a mass notification system control unit shall be listed for use with the control unit to
Chapter 24.4.2.1.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
This paragraph should be relocated to section 24.4.2.1 as it is currently in the section providing requirements for
textual visible notification. This requirement for power is applicable to all notification appliances not just textual visible
notification.
Relocate paragraph 24.4.2.21.9 to Section 24.4.2.1.3.
Renumber remaining sections.
The TC relocates the text to 24.4.2.1.3.
Printed on 1/28/2011
55
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-421 Log #405 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Move all requirements currently in Section 24.4.2.21.14 Character Size and Viewing Distance
including Sections 24.4.2.21.14.1 through 24.4.2.21.14.8 to Chapter 18.9. Textual Visible Appliances.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
These paragraphs should be moved to Chapter 18, Section 18.9.2 Textual Visible Appliances as Chapter 18 covers
general requirements for all Textual Visible Appliances not just textual appliances used for emergency communications
systems.
Revise 24.4.2.21 to read as follows:
Delete existing 24.4.2.21.1 through 24.4.2.21.4.
Renumber 24.4.2.21.5 to 24.4.2.21.1 and add “and graphical” after “textual”.
Renumber 24.4.2.21.6 to 24.4.2.21.2 and add “and graphical” after “textual”.
Add new 24.4.2.21.3 to read as follows:
24.4.2.21.3 Primary and supplemental textual and graphical visible appliances shall meet the requirements of Chapter
18.
Delete 24.4.2.21.7
Revise and renumber existing 24.4.2.21.8 as follows:
24.4.2.21.4 24.4.2.21.8 If a textual visible appliance, other than the main control unit, is not on a dedicated branch
circuit, it shall have a primary source of power and a secondary source of power and be monitored for power integrity in
accordance with Section 10.5. Textual and graphical visible appliances other than a main control unit shall be permitted
to not have a dedicated primary circuit as required by Chapter 10, but shall meet all other requirements for the
monitoring of primary power and all requirements for secondary power.
Delete 24.4.2.21.9 through 24.4.2.21.11.
Add new 24.4.2.21.5 to read as follows:
24.4.2.21.5 Textual and graphical visible appliances shall be permitted to be used for non-emergency purposes.
Renumber existing 24.4.2.21.12 to 24.4.2.21.6 and add “and graphical” after “textual”.
Renumber existing 24.4.2.21.13 to 24.4.2.21.7 and to read as follows:
24.4.2.21.7 Supplemental textual and graphical visible appliances that are not monitored for integrity or loss of
communication by a control unit shall be
provided with visual status indicators, including loss of communication or loss of power, that are clearly visible on the
appliance.
Delete existing 24.4.2.21.14 in its entirety.
Delete existing A.24.4.2.21.14 in its entirety.
This proposal now incorporates changes to Chapter 24 to accommodate changes in Chapter
18 and is more comprehensive than the ECS Proposal 72-421 (Log #CP109). The intent of the ECS proposal is to
move performance specifications for textual visible appliances from ECS to NAS.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-421a Log #CP109 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise 24.4.2.25 to read as follows:
24.4.2.25 Interfaces. Any system fault abnormal condition that would prevent reliable emergency operation of any
interfaced system shall be annunciated both audibly and visibly as a trouble signal at the affected control location.
The word “fault” is used and the TC believes that it should be changed to “abnormal” condition in order
to align with Proposal 72-22 (Log #498). The TC also adds “trouble signal” to clarify what type of signal is to be
annunciated.
Printed on 1/28/2011
56
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-422 Log #309 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Derek D. Mathews, Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.25.1.3* The fire alarm control interface shall coordinate signals to and from each system to accomplish the
following:
(1) Indicate the failure at the system control unit that will be impaired
(2) Provide a Supervisory indication to the fire alarm system that the mass notification system is active
(3) Cause the fire alarm system to deactivate all audible and visible notification appliances whose operation could
interfere with the intelligibility of the mass notification message or that will deliver conflicting information to occupants
(4) Not permit the fire alarm system to turn off audible and visible notification appliances for special suppression
pre-discharge notification required by 24.4.1.7.1
(5) Where required, provide for an Alarm signal to a supervising station in accordance with Chapter 26 that is indicative
of the mass notification system overriding the fire alarm system notification appliances during simultaneous fire and
mass notification events.
Propose to add the type of signal or indication that is to be transmitted and/or displayed for clarification
purposes.
Currently there is some confusion on what type of signal/indication is required because it is too generic. This submittal
is the result of the FACI Task Group work.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.25.1.3* The fire alarm control interface shall coordinate signals to and from each system to accomplish the
following:
(1) Indicate the failure at the system control unit that will be impaired
(2) Provide a signal indicating "MNS Active" at the FACU
(2) Provide a supervisory signal indication to the fire alarm system that the mass notification system is active
(3) Cause the fire alarm system to deactivate all audible and visible notification appliances whose operation could
interfere with the intelligibility of the mass notification message or that will deliver conflicting information to occupants
(4) Not permit the fire alarm system to turn off audible and visible notification appliances for special suppression
pre-discharge notification required by 24.4.1.7.1
(5) Where required by the emergency response plan or by other governing laws, codes or standards, or by other parts
of this code, or by the authority having jurisdiction, provide for an alarm a supervisory signal to a supervising station in
accordance with Chapter 26 that is indicative of the mass notification system overriding the fire alarm system notification
appliances during simultaneous fire and mass notification events.
The TC is very concerned about sending alarm and supervisory conditions off-site when the
MNS is utilized and no fire alarm condition exists. There are grave safety and security conditions that inappropriate
messages be sent to manned off-site locations. The TC provides new text for (2) to ensure that the indication is only
provided locally.
The TC edits (5) to provide specific guidance to the user relative to "where required".
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-423 Log #310 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Derek D. Mathews, Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.25.1.4 If the fire alarm control interface is used to broadcast non-emergency messages, music, or other signals
over the fire alarm notification appliance circuits, the operation shall meet the requirements of 24.4.2.18 and 23.8.4.
Since this section involves Fire Alarm systems, adding another section reference is needed for
thoroughness purposes. This submittal is the result of the FACI Task Group work.
Printed on 1/28/2011
57
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-424 Log #311 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Derek D. Mathews, Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.25.2 Interfaces to Building Controls Emergency Control Functions. The mass notification system shall be
permitted to provide air-handling control, door control, elevator controls, and control of other building systems per Ch. 21
as determined by the risk analysis, and as permitted by the authority having jurisdiction.
The correct term to use is Emergency Control Functions, which is covered by Ch. 21. This needed for
consistency reasons. This submittal is the result of the FACI Task Group work.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.25.2 Interfaces to Building Controls Emergency Control Functions. The mass notification system shall be
permitted to provide emergency control functions as described in Chapter 21 as required by the emergency response
plan and as permitted by the authority having jurisdiction.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and edits for clarity and consistency.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-425 Log #529 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Joshua Elvove, U.S. General Services Administration
Option 1 – Delete entire section
The mass notification system shall be permitted to provide air-handling
control, door control, elevator controls, and control of other building systems as determined by the risk analysis, and as
permitted by the authority having jurisdiction.
Option 2 – Revise as follows:
The mass notification system shall be permitted to interface with
emergency control functions provided emergency control functions comply with Chapter 21 provide air-handling control,
door control, elevator controls, and control of other building systems as determined by the risk analysis, and as
permitted by the authority having jurisdiction.
Two options. 1. Delete this requirement since it does not belong in Chapter 24 and is vague. For
example, what are building controls and are they the same or different from emergency control functions? 2. Revise as
noted to be sure that the interfaces pertain to emergency control functions and that all interfacing meets the
requirements of Chapter 21 that specifies the requirements for emergency control functions. Note: I suggest this
proposal also be sent to SIG-PRO.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-424 (Log #311).
Printed on 1/28/2011
58
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-426 Log #79 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Add text to read as follows:
24.4.2.25.2 Interfaces to Building Controls. The mass notification system shall be permitted to provide air-handling
control, door control, elevator controls, and control of other building systems as determined by the risk analysis
emergency response plan, and as permitted by the authority having jurisdiction.
24.4.2.25.2.1 When mass notifications systems are controlling building life safety systems the Mass Notifications
systems equipment shall be listed for UL 864,
The emergency response plan should be used to dictate how building control equipment will be
utilized. Further, if life safety systems will be taken over it is prudent for fire alarm systems to be used to provide for this
interface and operation.
The TC accepts 24.4.2.25.2 in principle. See action and statement on Proposal 72-424 (Log
#311).
The TC accepts 24.4.2.25.2.1.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-427 Log #78 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.2.27.2 A document signed by the emergency communications system designer attesting to the fact that the public
address system has been evaluated and meets the requirements determined by Chapter 24 and the risk analysis
emergency response plan, and is therefore deemed reliable and acceptable to provide emergency communications for
the particular facility, shall be maintained with the fire alarm record drawings.
The emergency response plan is the driving document not the risk analysis.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-428 Log #402 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Add text to read as follows:
System design shall incorporate designation of acoustically distinguishable spaces (ADS) within the
occupied areas as required in Chapter 18.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
The In-Building Mass Notification section does not provide a reference to acoustically distinguishable spaces. This
proposal provides that reference. The text was based on the similar requirement for In-Building EVACs in 24.4.1.2.2.2.
Add text to read as follows:
System design shall incorporate designation of acoustically distinguishable spaces (ADS) within the
occupied occupiable areas as required in Chapter 18.
Renumber subsequent sections.
The TC changes "occupied" to "occupiable" and provides an appropriate section number for
the text.
Printed on 1/28/2011
59
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-429 Log #403 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Add text to read as follows:
Audibility shall be required in all areas in accordance with Chapter 18.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
The In-Building Mass Notification section does not provide a reference to Chapter 18 for audible notification appliance
like 24.4.2.20.1 for visual appliances. This proposal provides that reference. The chapter is referenced instead of 18.4
because the general requirements in 18.3 will also apply. The text was based on the similar requirement for In-Building
EVACs in 24.4.1.2.2.3.
The existing 24.3.1 refers back to 18.4.1.5 which states that voice messages are not required
to meet the audibility requirements of 18.4.3 (Public Mode Audible Requirements), 18.4.4 (Private Mode Audible
Requirements), 18.4.5 (Sleeping Area Requirements), or 18.4.6 (Narrow Band Tone Signaling for Exceeding Masked
Thresholds), but shall
meet the intelligibility requirements of 18.4.10 where voice intelligibility is required.
These two sections address the submitter's concerns.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-430 Log #50 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Revise text to read as follows:
Voice Messages and Tones are covered in this paragraph, not just voice messages.
The TC chooses to retain the section heading.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-431 Log #77 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.3.1.2 Where identified by the risk analysis emergency response plan, multiple languages shall be permitted to be
used.
The emergency response plan is the driving document not the risk analysis.
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.3.1.2 Where
required by the risk analysis emergency response plan, multiple languages shall be
permitted to be used.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and changes "identified" to "required".
Printed on 1/28/2011
60
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-432 Log #51 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Revise text to read as follows:
Wide-area mass notification systems shall have multiple levels of password protection access control, including levels
for system administrators, system operators, maintainers, supervisors and executives, or other means to limit access to
system controls shall be provided based on a risk analysis.
System Administrator is the term used for those individuals that have the authority to execute add,
changes and deletes to the system and its associated software.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-433 Log #58 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Add new text to read as follows:
(4) Access Level 4. System Administrator. Access for those individuals that have the authority to execute adds,
changes and deletes to the system and its associated software.
This is a critical operation for the ongoing use of the system.
Add new text to read as follows:
(4)
Access by persons that serve in a system adminstrator capacity and are authorized to make
changes to the system and its associated software.
The TC notes that the submitter intended to add the text to A.24.4.3.2 as (4).
The TC modifies the submitter's text to be consistent with existing format.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-434 Log #76 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Rodger Reiswig, SimplexGrinnell
Revise text to read as follows:
24.4.3.2* Wide-area mass notification systems shall have multiple levels of password protection access control,
including levels for system operators, maintainers, supervisors, and executives, or other means to limit access to system
controls shall be provided based on a risk analysis the emergency response plan.
The emergency response plan is the driving document not the risk analysis.
Printed on 1/28/2011
61
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-435 Log #407 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Make the following editorial change:
Wide-area mass notification systems shall have multiple levels of password protection
access control, including levels for system operators, maintainers, supervisors, and executives, or other means to limit
access to system controls shall be provided based on a risk analysis.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
For editorial consistency.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-436 Log #406 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Make the following editorial change:
Wide-area mass notification systems shall be permitted to connect to regional mass
notification systems, public emergency alarm reporting systems, as defined in this Code, and public reporting systems
as defined in NFPA 1221,
.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
For editorial consistency.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-437 Log #52 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Revise text to read as follows:
The HPSA shall be arranged in such a manner to provide live and digital messaging, intelligible voice and audible
tones. communications.
This change is meant to clarify what the HPSA does.
The submitter has not provided technical substantiation for this change.
The TC is not understanding what is meant by "live and digital messaging".
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-438 Log #53 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Revise text to read as follows:
Secondary power for the HPSAs used for wide-area mass notification systems shall have sufficient capacity to operate
the unit for a minimum of 7 days in standby, followed by a minimum of 30 minutes 60 minutes of operation at full load.
The industry standard is 30 minutes at full load. Having to operate the amplifiers for 60 minutes will
only degrade the amplifier(s) thus causing a shorter life cycle.
The submitter has not provide technical substantiation to make this change.
Printed on 1/28/2011
62
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-439 Log #54 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Revise text to read as follows:
An HPSA shall have the capability to provide voice communications and tones communications as determined by the
emergency response plan.
This change is meant for clarification only.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-440 Log #55 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Add new text to read as follows:
High Powered Speaker Array shall be provided with means for visible notification to serve the hearing impaired, for
high noise areas and the influences of disruptive weather conditions.
HPSAs need to address the hearing impaired in outdoor areas and normal hearing persons in high
noise areas, as well as the effects of weather conditions that may disrupt the HPSA messages and tones.
The submitter has not provided technical substantiation to warrant inclusion in the Code.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-441 Log #56 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Add new text to read as follows:
HPSA notification zones shall not be used to provide mass
notification inside any structures.
Language.
The submitter indicates this is a new section. 24.4.3.4.5 already exists.
Printed on 1/28/2011
63
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-442 Log #61 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Revise text to read as follows:
High powered speaker arrays and their supporting structures should have a minimum design for wind speed of 100
miles/hr [161 km/hr (86.8 kn)] and gusts of 135 miles/hr [217 km/hr (117 km)]. Wind loads should be determined using a
recognized standard or code such as the local building code or the American Association of State Highway
Transportation Officials (AASHTO)
Wind Load Map. The supporting structure should be sized to accommodate the static and dynamic loads
produced by the sound systems and all attachments. Seismic loads are generally site specific.
NFPA 72 2010 maybe in conflict with a recognized standard used for devices mounted on poles
outdoors. In some cases, the minimum wind design speed in NFPA 72 2010 is less than what is recommended by
AASHTO (e.g., 150 mph for southern Florida).
The submitter's text is not in in a format that complies with the NFPA Regulations Governing
Committee Projects. The submitter is also referred to the MOS. The submitter is requested to provide submissions that
are complete, correct and can be acted upon.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-442a Log #CP110 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise 24.4.3.4.9.2 to read as follows:
24.4.3.4.9.2 The interface shall be monitored for integrity in accordance with Section 10.17, so that an abnormal
condition fault that could prevent reliable system operation is audibly and visibly annunciated as a trouble signal at both
systems’ control units.
The word “fault” is used and the TC believes that it should be changed to “abnormal condition” in order
to align with Proposal 72-22 (Log #498). The TC also adds “trouble signal” to clarify what type of signal is to be
annunciated.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-443 Log #57 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Revise text to read as follows:
The wide area mass notification system shall have the capability of a primary and redundant communications link with
minimal functional and spatial interconnection with each other. The risk analysis shall determine the need and extent of
the level of redundancy.
I don’t believe we should determining the redundancy requirements. I believe we should have the
capability of redundancy. The risk analysis needs to determine the level and extent.
The submitter's text adds no value to the Code and reduces the requirements. In this case,
the TC believes the redundancy is necessary.
Printed on 1/28/2011
64
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-443a Log #CP120 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Add 24.4.4.2.1 to read as follows:
24.4.4.2.1 DRMNS shall provide means of entering personnel data, and targeting supporting data, and / or integration
with organizations personnel directories.
New requirement addresses need for means to enter personnel data into the system; without
personnel data, DRMNS cannot operate.
No technical substantiation or means has been submitted to make this change.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-443b Log #CP121 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise 24.4.4.5 to read as follows:
24.4.4.5* Delivery Methods. The DRMNS shall be capable of sending alert messages to end-users (recipients) via
multiple delivery methods, and track delivery progress and recipients responses for accountability.
An important part for DRMNS (which was elaborated previously in the annex text, but not in the
requirements) is the capability to track and report delivery progress and recipient responses for accountability. Added
this capability to the delivery methods requirements to cover both delivery tracking as well.
The TC agrees that the ability to track delivery progress may be technically feasible but it
questions "recipients responses for accountability". How would the system know whether a message was delivered to a
designated individual if that individual’s mobile phone or pager was not actually with him? How would the system know
if a pop-up was delivered to a designated individual if that individual was not at his computer, or it was turned off or
unplugged?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-443c Log #CP118 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise 24.4.4.6 to read as follows:
24.4.4.6* Backup Distributed Recipient Mass Notification Systems. A stand-alone DRMNS used to send emergency
messages shall be provided with a backup configuration to facilitate distribution of messages.
Backup configuration is crucial for every DRMNS, not only stand-alone. Stand-alone was not
previously defined, and there is no reason to use it in this context.
Printed on 1/28/2011
65
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-443d Log #CP122 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Add new 24.4.4.7 to read as follows:
24.4.4.7* DRMNS shall monitor system components and integrated components and shall provide supervisory and
trouble signals to notify a Supervising Station in accordance with chapter 26, or a designated off site on duty system
administration team.
Add new A.24.4.4.7 to read as follows:
A.24.4.4.7 Not all DRMNS will have manned Supervising Station; a common practice is to use on-duty system
administration team who is notified in case of system component or integrated component failure that affects system
operation.
Adding supervision and trouble signals requirement, as well as extending on chapter 26, as it is not
typical to have a manned supervision station (of any of the 4 types) for DRMNS implementations.
The TC agrees that not all systems will be monitored by a supervising station in accordance
with Chapter 26. There is no criteria or definition provided for “a designated off site on duty system administration
team”.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-443e Log #CP123 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Add new 24.4.4.8 to read as follows:
24.4.4.8 DRMNS shall comply with the delivery capacity and Service Level Agreement (SLA) re availability, uptime and
provisioned delivery throughput, as designated in the risk analysis.
Add new 24.4.4.8 to read as follows:
A.24.4.4.8 DRMNS systems are different than other types of MNS as they rely on IP network infrastructure, as well as
provisioned capacity available for emergency alerts delivery. Performance based requirements specified in the risk
analysis will establish the specific organization and / or facility requirements for the DRMNS delivery and system
components.
Adding performance based criteria for common DRMNS design parameters, including provisioned
end-to-end capacity (affecting delivery throughput, and is affected also by allocated bandwidth, network routes, etc) as
well as SLA (uptime, high availability). Otherwise, there is no guarantee that the system will act as expected during
emergency situations. There were too many organizations deploying DRMNS without doing the required analysis to
determine what are their capacity needs, or procuring a capability without any or without sufficient performance criteria.
No technical substantiation has been submitted to make this change. There is no criteria or
definition provided for a “Service Level Agreement (SLA)”.
Printed on 1/28/2011
66
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-444 Log #533 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Robert P. Schifiliti, R. P. Schifiliti Associates, Inc.
Delete the title 24.5 Two-Way, In-Building Emergency Communications Systems.
Promote existing 24.5.1 to be 24.5. Promote existing 24.5.2 to be 24.6. Promote existing 24.4.3 to be 24.6. Promote
existing 24.4.4 to be 24.7.
The title is merely a description that causes everything under it to have one more decimal point. There
are no General requirements that apply to both subsystems. By promoting the subsections, they will now be found in
the Table of Contents.
The TC does not accept the submitter's recommendation. The TC believes the title, being the
first number, is appropriate.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-445 Log #359 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Peter Binkley, Evax Systems, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
Two-way telephone systems shall be with common talk mode (i.e., a conference or party line circuit) shall be
permitted.
Original wording would require this mode of operation. Common talk or party line is rarely used and
can be detrimental to clear communication. Should be an option, not a requirement.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-445a Log #CP102 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Where the term appears, change to read as follows:
24.5.2.2.1 "emergency fire command center(s)"
24.5.2.6.2 "emergency fire command center"
A.24.5.2.6.2 "emergency fire command center"
The TC changes Emergency Fire Command Center because two-way radio communication
enhancement systems are used in lieu of emergency firefighter telephone systems and the systems are only used in the
areas where fire command centers are used, therefore, the term is inappropriate.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-446 Log #343 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Vic Humm, Vic Humm & Associates
Add text to read as follows:
New Text 24.5.2..5.5 The secondary Power for the Radio System shall provide 12 hours operation at 100% capacity.
This information was originally extracted from NFPA 2 to be included in the In-Building Fireman’s
Communication. Presently, the detail explanation is in NFPA 1 on page 592.
Note: Supporting Material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters.
See action and statement on Proposal 72-448 (Log #501).
Printed on 1/28/2011
67
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-447 Log #500 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Andrew G. Berezowski, Honeywell Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
All repeater, transmitter, receiver, and signal booster components, and battery
system components shall be contained in a NEMA 4- or 4X- type enclosure(s).
The change is proposed to clarify that batteries and chargers supplying secondary power to the signal
booster are included in this requirement.
This proposal is the result of the work of the SIG-FUN PreROP Task Group 1 charged with reviewing power supply
requiremnets in Chapter 24 and related material for two-way radio communication enhancement systems found in
Annex O of NFPA 1 2009 and Appendix J of the 2009 IFC. Participating in the task group were: William Wayman, Jeff
Hancock, Lawrence Esch, Robert Bonifas, and Andrew Berezowski.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-448 Log #501 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Andrew G. Berezowski, Honeywell Inc.
Add text to read as follows:
. At least two independent and reliable power supplies shall be provided for all repeater,
transmitter, receiver, and signal booster components, one primary and one secondary.
. The primary power source shall be supplied from a dedicated branch circuit and
comply with 10.5.5.1.
Secondary Power Source. The secondary power source shall consist of one of the following:
(1) A storage battery dedicated to the system with at least 12 hours of 100 percent system operation capacity and
arranged in accordance with 10.5.9.
The battery requirement of 12 hours for the public safety radio enhancement system is purposely longer
than the 5-minute performance requirement for general evacuation and the 15-minute performance requirement for
emergency voice/alarm communication systems. This is due to the primary mission of these systems, where the fire
alarm system's primary mission is to assist fire detection and occupant egress, and the public safety radio enhancement
system's primary mission is to assist fire department operations, which might take longer than occupant egress.
(2 ) An automatic starting, engine-driven generator serving the dedicated branch circuit or the system with at least 12
hours of 100 percent system operation capacity and storage batteries dedicated to the system with at least 2 hours of
100 percent system operation capacity and arranged in accordance with 10.5.10.3.
Monitoring Integrity of Power Supplies. Monitoring the integrity of power supplies shall be in accordance
with 10.17.3.
The change is proposed to correlate with Annex O of NFPA 1 2009 and Appendix J of the 2009 IFC.
This proposal is the result of the work of the SIG-FUN PreROP Task Group 1 charged with reviewing power supply
requiremnets in Chapter 24 and related material for two-way radio communication enhancement systems found in
Annex O of NFPA 1 2009 and Appendix J of the 2009 IFC. Participating in the task group were: William Wayman, Jeff
Hancock, Lawrence Esch, Robert Bonifas, and Andrew Berezowski.
Printed on 1/28/2011
68
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-449 Log #502 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Andrew G. Berezowski, Honeywell Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
The public safety radio communications enhancement system shall include automatic
supervisory and trouble signals for malfunctions of the signal booster(s) and power supply(ies) that are annunciated by
the fire alarm system and comply with the following:
(1) The integrity of the circuit monitoring signal booster(s) and power supply(ies) shall comply with 10.17.1.
(2) System and signal booster supervisory signals shall include the following:
(a) Antenna malfunction
(b) Signal booster failure
(c) Low-battery capacity indication when 70 percent of the 12-hour operating capacity has been depleted.
(3) Power supply supervisory trouble signals shall include the following
for each signal booster:
(a) Loss of normal ac power.
(b) Failure of battery charger.
(c) Low-battery capacity, alarming at 70 percent of battery capacity.
The change is proposed to clarify the low battery indication criterion (70% of battery capacity is not a
low value) and to clarify which signals are trouble signals (requiring maintenance) and which signals are supervisory
signals (indicating failure or imminent failure of the system). This proposal is the result of the work of the SIG-FUN
PreROP Task Group 1 charged with reviewing power supply requiremnets in Chapter 24 and related material for
two-way radio communication enhancement systems found in Annex O of NFPA 1 2009 and Appendix J of the 2009
IFC. Participating in the task group were: William Wayman, Jeff Hancock, Lawrence Esch, Robert Bonifas, and Andrew
Berezowski.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-450 Log #530 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Joshua Elvove, U.S. General Services Administration
Delete the following:
Superfluous text. 21.1.4 already says to comply with Chapter 14.
24.1.4. to read as follows:
24.1.4 Inspection, testing and maintenance shall be performed in accordance with testing frequencies and methods in
Chapter 14.
Delete existing 24.5.2.8.
The TC notes that in his substantiation, the submitter referred to an incorrect section number.
The TC relocates the text and edits for clarity.
Printed on 1/28/2011
69
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-451 Log #566 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Dave Frable, U.S. General Services Administration
“Areas of refuge” or “areas of rescue assistance” are areas that have direct access to an exit, where people
who are unable to use stairs can remain temporarily in safety to await further instructions or assistance during
emergency evacuation or other emergency situation. It is, therefore, important that a method to communicate between
that location and a central control point where appropriate action for assistance be initiated.
Where required by the building code in force, an area of rescue assistance two-way emergency
communications system shall be installed in accordance with 24.5.3.
Generally, the building code or engineer specification will provide the specifics on the required locations of
the remote area of refuge (area of rescue assistance) stations, as well as the central control point.
The area of refuge (rescue assistance) emergency communications system shall be comprised of remotely
located area of refuge stations and a central control point.
The remote area of refuge stations and the central control point shall communicate with each other.
If the central control point is not constantly attended, it shall have a timed automatic communications capability
to connect with a constantly attended monitoring location acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction where
responsible personnel can initiate the appropriate response.
In order to ensure a timely response to a call for assistance, the call is to be forwarded to a constantly
attended approved location, such as a supervising station, 911 communications center, or other monitoring location
where responsible personnel can initiate the appropriate response.
The physical location of the central control point shall be as designated by the building code in force or the
authority having jurisdiction.
The area of refuge station shall provide for handsfree, two-way communication provide an audible and visible
signal to indicate communication has occured and indicate to the receiver the location sending the signal.
Instructions for the use of the two-way communications system instructions for summoning assistance via the
two-way communications system and written identification, including in braille, of the location shall be posted adjacent to
the two-way communications system.
Area of refuge two-way communication systems, if provided, shall be listed for two-way communication service
and installed in accordance with 24.5.3
Monitoring of the integrity of two-way communication circuits shall be in accordance with 10.17.2.2.
Two-way communication systems shall be a common talk mode (i.e., a party line circuit).
Two-way communication service shall be capable of permitting the simultaneous operation of any five two-way
communication systems in a common talk mode.
Currently all the applicable building codes (e.g., NFPA 500, IBC, and NFPA 101) have requirements
regarding the two-way communication system for areas of refuge. In addition, each of these Codes also have
requirements for a two-way communication to be installed at the elevator landing on each floor for communication
between the elevator landing and the fire command center or central control point approved by the authority having
jurisdiction. It appears the TC has not coordinated the subject two-way communication requirements stated in 24.5.3
with any of the requirements in the applicable building codes (e.g., NFPA 5000, IIBC, and NFPA 101). For example, the
term “areas of rescue assistance” is not a defined term. In addition, to my knowledge there currently are no building
code requirements for “areas” such as this to have direct access to an exit. Also, the requirements in Sections 24.5.3.1
thru 24.5.3.7 are covered in the applicable building code. In addition, it also appears that the TC may have overstepped
their scope regarding specifying certain requirements in NFPA 72 for the subject two-way communication system. Key
factors that the TC did not address include, but are not limited to; monitoring integrity of two-way communication circuits,
common talk mode, etc. Based on the above stated reasons, I have deleted the existing text in Section 24.5.3 and
provided new text to incorporate key factors that need to be addressed in NFPA 72 for these systems. In addition, I have
proposed new text in Chapter 14 to coordinate the revisions made in Section 24.5.3.
Staff Note: A proposal has also been sent to SIG-TMS related to Tables 14.3.1, 14.4.2.2 and 14.4.5.
Wiring for area of refuge ECS is different than that of two-way in-building wired emergency
communications systems.
The TC is not aware of specific fire listings for area of refuge ECS.
Printed on 1/28/2011
70
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-452 Log #567 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Dave Frable, U.S. General Services Administration
Delete text as follows:
“Areas of refuge” or “areas of rescue assistance” are areas that have direct access to an exit, where people
who are unable to use stairs can remain temporarily in safety to await further instructions or assistance during
emergency evacuation or other emergency situation. It is, therefore, important that a method to communicate between
that location and a central control point where appropriate action for assistance be initiated.
Where required by the building code in force, an area of rescue assistance two-way emergency
communications system shall be installed in accordance with 24.5.3.
Generally, the building code or engineer specification will provide the specifics on the required locations of
the remote area of refuge (area of rescue assistance) stations, as well as the central control point.
The area of refuge (rescue assistance) emergency communications system shall be comprised of remotely
located area of refuge stations and a central control point.
The remote area of refuge stations and the central control point shall communicate with each other.
If the central control point is not constantly attended, it shall have a timed automatic communications
capability to connect with a constantly attended monitoring location acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction where
responsible personnel can initiate the appropriate response.
In order to ensure a timely response to a call for assistance, the call is to be forwarded to a constantly
attended approved location, such as a supervising station, 911 communications center, or other monitoring location
where responsible personnel can initiate the appropriate response.
The physical location of the central control point shall be as designated by the building code in force or the
authority having jurisdiction.
The area of refuge station shall provide for handsfree, two-way communication provide an audible and visible
signal to indicate communication has occured and indicate to the receiver the location sending the signal.
Instructions for the use of the two-way communications system instructions for summoning assistance via the
two-way communications system and written identification, including in braille, of the location shall be posted adjacent to
the two-way communications system.
Currently all the applicable building codes (e.g., NFPA 500, IBC, and NFPA 101) have requirements
regarding the two-way communication system for areas of refuge. In addition, each of these Codes also have
requirements for a two-way communication to be installed at the elevator landing on each floor for communication
between the elevator landing and the fire command center or central control point approved by the authority having
jurisdiction. It appears the TC has not coordinated the subject two-way communication requirements stated in 24.5.3
with any of the requirements in the applicable building codes (e.g., NFPA 5000, IIBC, and NFPA 101). For example, the
term “areas of rescue assistance” is not a defined term. In addition, to my knowledge there currently are no building
code requirements for “areas” such as this to have direct access to an exit. Also, the requirements in Sections 24.5.3.1
thru 24.5.3.7 are covered in the applicable building code. In addition, it also appears that the TC may have overstepped
their scope regarding specifying certain requirements in NFPA 72 for the subject two-way communication system. Key
factors that the TC did not address include, but are not limited to; system installer qualifications, ITM personnel
qualifications, ITM requirements, monitoring integrity of two-way communication circuits, etc. Based on the above
stated reasons Section 24.5.3 should be deleted.
The building codes require area of refuge communication systems but NFPA 72 provides
operational, installation, testing and maintenance requirements.
Printed on 1/28/2011
71
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-453 Log #360 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Peter Binkley, Evax Systems, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
The area of refuge station shall provide for handsfree, two-way communication, provide an audible and visible
signal to indicate communication has occurred and indicate to the receiver the location sending the signal.
Simply added a comma to clean up statement and corrected spelling of “occured”.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-453a Log #CP108 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise 24.5.4 to read as follows:
24.5.4 Elevator Emergency Communications Systems.
24.5.4.1 Elevator two-way emergency communications systems shall be installed
in accordance with the requirements of ANSI/ASME A17.1a/CSA B44a, Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators.
24.5.4.2 Communication shall be provided for the lobbies where the elevators are used for occupant-controlled
evacuation.
The TC adds a new section providing requirements for communication for occupant-controlled
evacuation to accommodate changes from the A.17 ASME committee.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-454 Log #384 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Shane Clary, Bay Alarm Company
Revise the text as follows:
"At the central control station, the emergency communications All control units shall meet the…"
In is the intent of SIG-FUN that all control units should meet the requirements of Section 10.5, and not
just emergency communications control units. The preset text appear to be in conflict with Section 10.5.
Printed on 1/28/2011
72
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-455 Log #503 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Andrew G. Berezowski, Honeywell Inc.
Add text to read as follows:
At the central control station, the emergency communications All control units shall meet the requirements of
Section 10.5.
The power supply for the central control station shall include an uninterrupted power source with capacity
sufficient to support the emergency response plan established for the specific premises to support the emergency
response plan established for the specific premises.
The change is proposed to clarify that all control units are required to comply with Fundamentals
Section 10.5.
This proposal is the result of the work of the SIG-FUN PreROP Task Group 1 charged with reviewing power supply
requiremnets in Chapter 24 and related material for two-way radio communication enhancement systems found in
Annex O of NFPA 1 2009 and Appendix J of the 2009 IFC. Participating in the task group were: William Wayman, Tom
Norton, Jeff Hancock, Lawrence Esch, Robert Bonifas, and Andrew Berezowski.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-456 Log #242 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
John S. Fuoto, AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
(1) The risk analysis, design criteria, design brief, system performance, are developed in the spirit of this chapter
section.
Section 24.7.7 and section 24.4.2.2 both address risk analysis for mass notification systems. Sections
24.7.7.1.3 through 24.7.7.5 should be moved and consolidated into section 24.4.2.2 to assure that all code requirements
are in one location and are completely consistent with each other and that requirements for risk analysis appear before
the section on performance-based design. Thus, this section should no longer refer to risk analysis as being addressed
by this section.
Revise text to read as follows:
(1) The risk analysis, design criteria, design brief, system performance, are developed in accordance with the spirit of
this chapter section.
The TC agrees to change "chapter" to "section" and sees no need to delete "risk analysis".
Further, the TC changes "the spirit of" to "accordance with".
The TC does not necessarily agree with the submitter's substantiation.
Printed on 1/28/2011
73
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-457 Log #243 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
John S. Fuoto, AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc.
The performance-based design and risk analysis shall be performed by a design professional
certified or approved by the authority having jurisdiction.
Section 24.7.7 and section 24.4.2.2 both address risk analysis for mass notification systems. Sections
24.7.7.1.3 through 24.7.7.5 should be moved and consolidated into section 24.4.2.2 to assure that all code requirements
are in one location and are completely consistent with each other and that requirements for risk analysis appear before
the section on performance-based design. Thus, this section should no longer refer to risk analysis as being addressed
by this section.
The TC sees no need to delete "risk analysis". The design professional should use the risk
analysis as part of the design analysis.
The TC does not necessarily agree with the submitter's substantiation.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-458 Log #244 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
John S. Fuoto, AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
All designs shall meet the goals and objectives specified in 24.7.1 and shall be considered
equivalent, provided that (1) the design meets the risk analysis requirements; (2) the performance criterion in 24.7.6.2 is
met, the requirements of 24.7.6.2, 24.7.6.4 through 24.7.6.7 are met, (3) the design team as delineated in 24.7.6.3
concurs with the design. ,and the risk analysis considers the following factors… the emergency response plan.
Section 24.7.7 and section 24.4.2.2 both address risk analysis for mass notification systems. Sections
24.7.7.1.3 through 24.7.7.5 should be moved and consolidated into section 24.4.2.2. Remaining portions of existing
24.7.7 are renumbered as 24.7.6.4 through 24.7.6.7 respectively. The above wording is consistent with those proposals.
The submitter has not provided technical substantiation to make this change.
The submitter's substantiation is not consistent with the action requested.
The TC does not necessarily agree with the submitter's substantiation.
Printed on 1/28/2011
74
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-459 Log #245 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
John S. Fuoto, AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc.
Revise this section as follows:
Move and consolidate Sections 24.7.7.1.3 through 24.7.7.5 into section 24.4.2.2.
Renumber Sections 24.7.7.1 and 24.7.7.2 as Sections 24.7.6.4 and 24.7.6.5, respectively.
Renumber Sections 24.7.7.5 and 24.7.7.6 as Sections 24.7.6.6 and 24.7.6.7, respectively
Renumber Sections 24.7.7.6.1 and 24.7.7.6.2 as Sections 24.7.6.7.1 and 24.7.6.7.2, respectively.
Risk analysis and emergency plan inform the performance requirements. This section and section
24.4.2.2 both address risk analysis for mass notification systems. Sections 24.7.7.1.3 through 24.7.7.5 should be moved
and consolidated into section 24.4.2.2 to assure that all code requirements are in one location and are completely
consistent with each other and that requirements for risk analysis and emergency plan appear before the section on
performance-based design. The remaining sections are related to performance
criteria and therefore belong in Section 24.7.6
See action and statement on Proposal 72-377 (Log #537).
The TC does not necessarily agree with the submitter's substantiation.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-590 Log #398 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
Unless the risk analysis determines otherwise, the fire alarm system should always be automatically
returned to normal functionality. If the fire alarm system is automatically returned to normal functionality, the building
emergency response plan should state that no user intervention is required. When manual intervention is required to
return the fire alarm system to normal, specific Specific instructions should be in place explaining how the fire alarm
system notification appliances should be reactivated in the emergency response plan, and at the fire alarm and mass
notification control units. This could vary and should be documented in the building emergency response plan.
Individuals responsible for manually returning the fire alarm system to normal should be properly trained in the
procedure.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
Annex material is clarified to provide guidance that additional information is necessary when the fire alarm system will
require manual intervention. The proposal provides a reference that individuals are properly trained to complete the
procedure.
Revise text to read as follows:
Unless the risk analysis determines otherwise, the fire alarm system should always be automatically
returned to normal functionality. If the fire alarm system is automatically returned to normal functionality, the building
emergency response plan should state that no user intervention is required. When manual intervention is required to
return the fire alarm system to normal, specific Specific instructions should be in place in the emergency response plan
explaining how the fire alarm system notification appliances should be reactivated. These instructions should be located
at the fire alarm and mass notification control units. This could vary and should be documented in the building
emergency response plan. Individuals responsible for manually returning the fire alarm system to normal should be
properly trained in the procedure.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and edits for clarity.
Printed on 1/28/2011
75
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-591 Log #15 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Justin Yates, Lacey Fire Protection Engineering
Revise third paragraph as follows:
When actuated, Based upon a detailed risk analysis and emergency response plan certain recorded or live mass
notification voice messages should may take priority over fire alarm messages and signals. If the fire alarm system is in
the alarm mode when recorded voice message or audible signals are sounding, and the mass notification system is
actuated with a signal of higher priority, it should temporarily cause deactivation of all fire alarm-initiates audible and
visible notification appliances during the time period required to transmit the mass notification emergency message."
Specific annex section would no longer conflict with section 24.4.2.1.8 (NFPA 72 2010).
Revise third paragraph as follows:
When actuated, Based upon a detailed risk analysis and emergency response plan, certain recorded or live mass
notification voice messages should could take priority over fire alarm messages and signals. If the fire alarm system is in
the alarm mode when recorded voice message or audible signals are sounding, and the mass notification system is
actuated with a signal of higher priority, it should temporarily cause deactivation of all fire alarm-initiates audible and
visible notification appliances during the time period required to transmit the mass notification emergency message.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and changes "may" to "could".
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-592 Log #395 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel P. Finnegan, Siemens Industry, Inc.
Revise text to read as follows:
(3) When you are ready to announce, key the microphone and read the message two to three times at least three
times.
This proposal was developed by the NFPA 72 SIG-ECS Task Group on In-Building MNS Notification
(TG Members: Bruce Fraser, Andrew Woodward, Laura Doyle, Dan Menequin and Dan Finnegan.)
The description above the item 3 is inconsistent. This proposal corrects the inconsistency so that this section
recommends the message is repeated at least three times.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-592a Log #CP126 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise A.24.4.3.3 to read as follows
A.24.4.3.3 A wide-area mass notification system could have the capability to communicate with other notification
systems on the site, such as the telephone alerting system, paging system, cell phone, pager, PDA activation, e-Blast,
message scrolling, reverse 911, fax transmission, and highway advisory radio, and sign control system (used for
dynamic control of radio information and traffic signs for emergency information and traffic management) and with
DRMNS.
The list of personal delivery devices is all covered by DRMNS, so best is to call for optional integration
with this class of systems; still, there could also be integration with site specific alerting systems, which are left in the
text.
No technical substantiation has been submitted to make this change. Removing the systems
noted in the proposal could be construed by the user that communications with these might be prohibited.
Printed on 1/28/2011
76
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-593 Log #59 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Delete text as follows:
Intelligibility meters with internal compensation should be used to adjust STI measurement for other than normal
weather conditions
STI meters that I am familiar (including the Gold-Line STIC), do not have the capability to take the long
range measurements appropriate for outdoors; the distance is limited by the length of the wire (~20 feet or so).
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-594 Log #60 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Todd C. Shearer, SimplexGrinnell / Rep. NEMA
Revise text to read as follows:
High powered speaker arrays should be mounted not to exceed the OSHA and FEMA occupational noise exposure
limits or an absolute limit of 123 C-weighted decibels (dBC) to anyone in the immediate vicinity of the speakers.
Include published absolute limit for noise exposure.
Revise text to read as follows:
High powered speaker arrays should be mounted not to exceed the OSHA and FEMA Publication CPG-17 for
occupational noise exposure limits or an absolute limit of 123 C-weighted decibels (dBC) as referenced in FEMA to
anyone in the immediate vicinity of the speakers.
Add new H.1.2.14 to read as follows:
H.1.2.14
FEMA Headquarters, 500 C Street, SW, Washington DC, 20472
FEMA Publication CPG-17.
, March, 1980
Renumber remaining sections.
The TC accepts the submitter's text and includes reference to the FEMA document.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-594a Log #CP116 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise paragraph 8 of A.24.4.4 to read as follows:
NCAS leverage the IP network infrastructure to instantly reach those personnel who have access to nearly any
IP-connected devices [such as pop-up alerts on personal computers (PC), text messages to personal data assistants
(PDA) and cellular telephones, electronic mail to IP capable cellular telephones, and recorded voice messages to
voiceover-IP (VolP) telephones and PCs]. Additionally, NCAS could be used to activate, through a single interface, other
(IP based and non-IP based) alerting systems, such as wide-area alerting systems and traditional dial-up telephone
alerting systems.
Activation via single interface is applicable for IP and non-IP based systems, so there is no need to
limit, but important to state the integration capability with both types. Equipment was traditionally non-IP based, but now
we see equipment is IP-enabled.
Printed on 1/28/2011
77
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-594b Log #CP117 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise paragraph 9 of A.24.4.4 to read as follows:
NCAS can be installed independently or at a central location. In a centrally managed NCAS configuration, personnel
and facilities in the regional operations center's particular area of coverage could be alerted instantly by events, either
from any individual installation, or centrally from the regional operations center. Using management tools, designated
operators from each installation in the region could log in via a web browser and have complete access to their own
portion of the NCAS. The regional operations center would retain the ability to centrally monitor and manage all portions
of the system, including supervisory and trouble conditions of the different system components and integrated
components.
DRMNS is the only component which does not address supervision and trouble signals at this point; it
is needed to monitor and notify of system component integrity failure.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-594c Log #CP105 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise as follows:
A.24.4.4.3 Distributed recipient mass notification systems could use a Web-based user interface, support locally
designated standard network ports and protocols, and provide open interfaces to support interoperability, such as
eXtensible markup language (XML) and common access alerting protocol (CAP) based emergency messages.
Add new text to read as follows:
H.1.2.14
Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS), 25
Corporate Drive, Suite 103, Burlington, MA 01803.
OASIS Standard CAP-V1.2, OASIS Common Alerting Protocol Version 1.2
Renumber remaining sections.
The common alerting protocol is incorrectly referred to as the common access protocol. The proposal
corrects the naming and provides a reference in Annex H.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-594d Log #CP119 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Technical Committee on Emergency Communication Systems,
Revise A.24.4.4.6 to read as follows:
A.24.4.4.6 A distributed recipient mass notification system could support multiple server and multiple site
configurations to achieve a "hot standby" failover configuration (i.e., no down time in case of failure in a single server),
as well as to support higher load scenarios (e.g., more users). This could be accomplished with premises-based
systems or hosted configurations.
The TC adds the option for multi-site redundancy and not only server redundancy, as is specified now.
Printed on 1/28/2011
78
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-595 Log #247 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
John S. Fuoto, AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc.
Delete text as follows:
[Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this annex should be incorporated with the annex material for section 24.4.2.2. These
paragraphs address the fundamentals of what a risk analysis should consider.]
Fifth paragraph should begin: “The mass notification system should be evaluated (risk analysis) and take into
account…”
Section 24.7.7 and Section 24.4.2.2 both address risk analysis for mass notification systems. Sections
24.7.7.1.3 through 24.7.7.5 should be moved and consolidated into section 24.4.2.2 to assure that all code requirements
are in one location and are completely consistent with each other and that requirements for risk analysis appear before
the section on performance-based design. Thus, these three paragraphs in the Annex should be put with the risk
analysis annex material and other portions that refer to risk analysis should be re-written to reflect that risk analysis
information is not in this section.
The TC does not accept the submitter's recommendation relative to Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 as
he has not provided specific direction.
The TC accepts the submitter's revision to paragraph 5.
The TC does not necessarily agree with the submitter's substantiation.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-596 Log #246 SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
John S. Fuoto, AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc.
Delete text as follows:
A.24.7.7 The risk analysis forms the basis for the emergency response plan.
Section 24.7.7 and section 24.4.2.2 both address risk analysis for mass notification systems. Sections
24.7.7.1.3 through 24.7.7.5 should be moved and consolidated into section 24.4.2.2 to assure that all code requirements
are in one location and are completely consistent with each other and that requirements for risk analysis appear before
the section on performance-based design. Thus, annex material is no longer needed.
Refer to action and statement on Proposal 72-377 (Log #537).
The TC does not necessarily agree with the submitter's substantiation.
Printed on 1/28/2011
79
Report on Proposals – June 2012
NFPA 72
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
72-613 Log #24b SIG-ECS
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
John F. Bender, Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
Revise text as follows:
American National Standards Institute, Inc., 25 West 43rd Street, 4th floor, New York, NY
10036.
ANSI/ASME A17.1a/CSA B44a,
, 2008.
ANSI/ATA 878.1,
, 1999.
ANSI/EIA 709.1,
, 1999.
ANSI/FM 3260,
2004.
ANSI S3.2,
, 1989, revised 1999.
ANSI S3.41,
, 1990, reaffirmed 2008.
ANSI/UL 268,
, 2006 2009. (SIG-IDS)
ANSI/UL 464,
2003, revised 2008 2009. (SIG-NAS)
ANSI/UL 521,
, 1999, revised 2004 2010. (SIG-NAS)
ANSI/UL 864,
, 2003, revised 2006 2010.
(SIG-ECS, SIG-TMS)
ANSI/UL 1638,
2001, revised 2008.
ANSI/UL 1971,
, 2002, revised 2008.
Update referenced standards to most recent revisions. UL 268 is the first publication of the common
UL and ULC standard for Smoke Detectors for Fire Alarm Systems. National differences are identified in the new
standard. UL 464 includes a new section for protective covers and accessories and a new jarring test, revises marking
requirements, outdoor use salt spray test, various test voltages, temperature tests, endurance test, and deletes the dust
test. ANSI/UL 521 updated the temperature test. UL 864 has been revised to include fail-safe fire release devices.
Printed on 1/28/2011
80