AGENDA NFPA Technical Committee on Building Service and ...€¦ · Todd Warner, Principal Brooks...

AGENDA NFPA Technical Committee on Building Service and

Fire Protection Equipment NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meeting

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Hilton Fort Lauderdale Marina

Fort Lauderdale, Florida

1. Call to order. Call meeting to order by Chair Joe Jardin at 8:00 AM (CDT) on Tuesday,

June 21, 2016.

2. Introduction of committee members and guests. For a current committee roster, see page 2.

3. Approval of July 29, 2015 first draft meeting minutes. See page 6.

4. The process – staff PowerPoint presentation. See page 9.

5. NFPA 101 Second Draft preparation. For Public Comments, see page 43.

6. NFPA 5000 Second Draft preparation. For Public Comments, see page 74.

7. NFPA 101/5000 Committee Inputs, see page 94.

8. NFPA 101/5000 Format Review.

9. Task Group Report: Mass Notification

10. Other business.

11. Future meetings.

12. Adjournment.

Enclosures

Page 1 of 67

Address List No PhoneBuilding Service and Fire Protection Equipment SAF-BSF

Safety to Life

Tracy L. Vecchiarelli06/03/2016

SAF-BSF

Joseph M. Jardin

ChairFire Department City of New York16 Dexter CourtHauppauge, NY 11788NFPA Fire Service SectionAlternate: Greg Gottlieb

C 1/1/1991SAF-BSF

Tracy L. Vecchiarelli

Secretary (Staff-Nonvoting)National Fire Protection Association1 Batterymarch ParkQuincy, MA 02169-7471

2/3/2016

SAF-BSF

Harry L. Bradley

PrincipalMaryland State Fire Marshals Office5 West Riding DriveBel-Air, MD 21014International Fire Marshals Association

E 1/1/1991SAF-BSF

Kevin L. Brinkman

PrincipalNational Elevator Industry, Inc.925 West Center StreetEureka, IL 61530-9505National Elevator Industry Inc.Alternate: Gary L. Nuschler

M 08/17/2015

SAF-BSF

Pat D. Brock

PrincipalOklahoma State UniversityFire Protection & Safety Technology1424 West Liberty AvenueStillwater, OK 74075Alternate: Bryan Lawrence Hoskins

SE 1/1/1987SAF-BSF

Flora F. Chen

PrincipalHayward Fire Department, California777 B StreetHayward, CA 94541

E 10/20/2010

SAF-BSF

Stephen E. Dale

PrincipalCincinnati Insurance Company6200 South Gilmore RoadFairfield, OH 45014-5141

I 08/09/2012SAF-BSF

Bryan Dempsey

PrincipalVivint212 Tricia LaneHutto, TX 78634-4479Electronic Security Association

IM 12/08/2015

SAF-BSF

Paul M. Donga

PrincipalBoston Fire Department115 Southampton StreetBoston, MA 02118

E 7/20/2000SAF-BSF

Raymond A. Grill

PrincipalArup1120 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1110Washington, DC 20036

SE 3/2/2010

SAF-BSF

Thomas P. Hammerberg

PrincipalAutomatic Fire Alarm Association, Inc.141 Sawyer LaneJasper, GA 30143Alternate: Kristian White

M 10/23/2003SAF-BSF

Jeffrey M. Hugo

PrincipalNational Fire Sprinkler Association, Inc.1088 West Borton RoadEssexville, MI 48732-1541Alternate: Robert Upson

M 7/26/2007

SAF-BSF

Claude O. Hutton

PrincipalVirginia State Fire Marshal’s Office1165 East Lee HighwayChilhowie, VA 24319

E 08/09/2012

1Page 2 of 67


Safety to Life


SAF-BSF

Michael Kellett

PrincipalState of ConnecticutOffice of the State Fire Marshal165 Capitol Avenue, Room 258Hartford, CT 06106Connecticut State Fire Marshal/Connecticut Fire MarshalsAssociationAlternate: Ignatius Kapalczynski

E 7/26/2007SAF-BSF

David A. Killian

PrincipalWalt Disney Parks & ResortsMAPO Building1401 Flower StreetGlendale, CA 91201

U 8/2/2010

SAF-BSF

David L. Klepitch

PrincipalLasalle Engineering1000 York RoadWillow Grove, PA 19090

SE 8/2/2010SAF-BSF

Richard L. Klinker

PrincipalKlinker & Associates, Inc.2355 Davidsonville RoadGambrills, MD 21054Alternate: Claudia Hagood

SE 1/1/1981

SAF-BSF

Peter A. Larrimer

PrincipalUS Department of Veterans Affairs1805 Constitution BlvdValencia, PA 16059Alternate: Peter Leszczak

U 4/1/1994SAF-BSF

Daniel J. Lazarz

PrincipalEYP Architecture & Engineering470 Atlantic Avenue, 7th FloorBoston, MA 02210-2228Alternate: Kelly Finzel

SE 8/9/2011

SAF-BSF

Thomas W. McKeon

PrincipalEverest National Insurance18 Kalan Farm RoadHampton, NJ 08827-2559

I 12/08/2015SAF-BSF

James Noveh

PrincipalJefferson Parish Fire Department1221 Elmwood Park Blvd., Suite 310Jefferson, LA 70123

E 10/20/2010

SAF-BSF

Scott E. Panowitz

PrincipalBFPE International7512 Connelley DriveHanover, MD 21076Fire Suppression Systems Association

M 03/05/2012SAF-BSF

Martin H. Reiss

PrincipalJENSEN HUGHES1661 Worcester Road, Suite 501Framingham, MA 01701-5401Alternate: Kurt A. Ruchala

SE 7/1/1993

SAF-BSF

Rodger Reiswig

PrincipalTyco/SimplexGrinnell3640 Haddington CourtApopka, FL 32712-5690Alternate: Paul J. Vautour

M 01/10/2008SAF-BSF

Richard Jay Roberts

PrincipalHoneywell Fire Safety624 Hammer LaneNorth Aurora, IL 60542-9155National Electrical Manufacturers AssociationAlternate: Daniel P. Finnegan

M 10/20/2010

SAF-BSF

Lawrence J. Shudak

PrincipalUL LLC333 Pfingsten RoadNorthbrook, IL 60062-2096

RT 4/15/2004

2Page 3 of 67


Safety to Life


SAF-BSF

Michael R. Szmanda

PrincipalCertification & Training CorporationM-R-J Security LLC1641 Island CourtWaconia, MN 55387

IM 8/9/2011SAF-BSF

Todd W. Warner

PrincipalBrooks Equipment Company, Inc.112 Beechridge CourtChapel Hill, NC 27517Fire Equipment Manufacturers' AssociationAlternate: Roy C. Kimball

M 07/29/2013

SAF-BSF

Carl D. Wren

PrincipalCity of AustinDevelopment Services DepartmentOne Texas Center, Suite 200505 Barton Springs RoadAustin, TX 78704

E 10/6/2000SAF-BSF

David M. Wyatt

PrincipalPacific Northwest National Laboratory-Battelle2201 South Cleveland StreetKennewick, WA 99338

U 3/2/2010

SAF-BSF

Daniel P. Finnegan

AlternateSiemens Industry, Inc.Building Technologies DivisionFire & Security2953 Exeter CourtWest Dundee, IL 60118-1724National Electrical Manufacturers AssociationPrincipal: Richard Jay Roberts

M 10/20/2010SAF-BSF

Kelly Finzel

AlternateH2M Architects + Engineers538 Broad Hollow Road, 4th FloorMelville, NY 11747-3676Principal: Daniel J. Lazarz

SE 12/08/2015

SAF-BSF

Greg Gottlieb

AlternateHauppauge Fire District855 Wheeler RoadHauppauge, NY 11788NFPA Fire Service SectionPrincipal: Joseph M. Jardin

C 4/1/1993SAF-BSF

Claudia Hagood

AlternateKlinker and Associates, Inc.2355 Davidsonville RoadGambrills, MD 21054Principal: Richard L. Klinker

SE 7/1/1993

SAF-BSF

Bryan Lawrence Hoskins

AlternateOklahoma State University499 Cordell SouthStillwater, OK 74078Principal: Pat D. Brock

SE 10/29/2012SAF-BSF

Ignatius Kapalczynski

AlternateSimsbury Fire DistrictDeputy Fire Marshal139 Selden Hill DriveWest Hartford, CT 06107Connecticut State Fire Marshal/Connecticut Fire MarshalsAssociationPrincipal: Michael Kellett

E 10/6/2000

3Page 4 of 67


Safety to Life


SAF-BSF

Roy C. Kimball

AlternateBrooks Equipment Company, Inc.PO Box 481888Charlotte, NC 28269Fire Equipment Manufacturers' AssociationPrincipal: Todd W. Warner

M 4/15/2004SAF-BSF

Peter Leszczak

AlternateUS Department of Veterans Affairs950 Campbell AvenueWest Haven, CT 06516Principal: Peter A. Larrimer

U 11/2/2006

SAF-BSF

Gary L. Nuschler

AlternateOtis Elevator Company5 Farm Springs RoadFarmington, CT 06032-2575National Elevator Industry Inc.Principal: Kevin L. Brinkman

M 4/15/2004SAF-BSF

Kurt A. Ruchala

AlternateJensen Hughes/FIREPRO Incorporated1600 Osgood Street, Suite 2082North Andover, MA 01845JENSEN HUGHESPrincipal: Martin H. Reiss

SE 3/1/2011

SAF-BSF

Robert Upson

AlternateNational Fire Sprinkler Association40 Jon Barrett RoadPatterson, NY 12563-2164Principal: Jeffrey M. Hugo

M 10/28/2014SAF-BSF

Paul J. Vautour

AlternateTyco/SimplexGrinnell50 Technology DriveWestminster, MA 01441Principal: Rodger Reiswig

M 03/05/2012

SAF-BSF

Kristian White

AlternateSpace Age Electronics, Inc.4532 West Kennedy BoulevardPMB 295Tampa, FL 33609-2042Automatic Fire Alarm Association, Inc.Principal: Thomas P. Hammerberg

M 08/11/2014SAF-BSF

Tracy L. Vecchiarelli

Staff LiaisonNational Fire Protection Association1 Batterymarch ParkQuincy, MA 02169-7471

2/3/2016

4Page 5 of 67

NFPA Technical Committee on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 First Draft Meeting Minutes July 29, 2015

InterContinental Hotel Milwaukee

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

1. Call to order. The meeting was called to order by Chair Joseph Jardin at 8:00 AM, July

29, 2015.

2. Introduction of committee members and guests.

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT

NAME COMPANY Joseph Jardin, Chair Fire Department City of New York, Rep.

NFPA Fire Service Section

Pat Brock, Principal Oklahoma State University

Stephen Dale, Principal Cincinnati Insurance Company

Daniel Finnegan, Alt. to R. Roberts Siemens Industry, Inc., Rep. National

Electrical Manufacturers Association

Raymond Grill, Principal Arup

Thomas Hammerberg, Principal Automatic Fire Alarm Association, Inc.

Bryan Hoskins, Alt. to P. Brock Oklahoma State University

Jeffrey Hugo, Principal National Fire Sprinkler Association, Inc.

Ignatius Kapalczynski, Alt. to M.

Kellett

Simsbury Fire District, Rep. Connecticut State

Fire Marshal/Connecticut Fire Marshals

Association

Peter Larrimer, Principal US Department of Veterans Affairs

Daniel Lazarz, Principal EYP Architecture & Engineering

Gary Nuschler, Alt. to B. Black Otis Elevator Company, Rep. National

Elevator Industry Inc.

Scott Panowitz, Principal Fire Suppression Systems Association

Martin Reiss, Principal JENSEN HUGHES

Rodger Reiswig, Principal Tyco/SimplexGrinnell

Richard Roberts, Principal Honeywell Life Safety, Rep. National

Electrical Manufacturers Association

Kurt Ruchala, Principal FIREPRO Incorporated

Page 6 of 67

Lawrence Shudak, Principal UL LLC

Robert Upson, Alt. to J. Hugo National Fire Sprinkler Association

Paul Vatour, Alt. to R. Reiswig Tyco/SimplexGrinnell

Todd Warner, Principal Brooks Equipment Company, Inc., Rep. Fire

Equipment Manufacturers’ Association

David Wyatt, Principal Pacific Northwest National Laboratory-

Battelle

Gregory Harrington, Secretary

(Nonvoting)

National Fire Protection Association

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS NOT PRESENT (NOT LISTED WHERE ALTERNATE ATTENDED)

NAME COMPANY

Harry Bradley, Principal International Fire Marshals Association

Flora Chen, Principal Hayward Fire Department, California

Paul Donga, Principal Boston Fire Department

Claude Hutton, Principal Virginia State Fire Marshal’s Office

David Killian, Principal Walt Disney Parks & Resorts

David Klepitch, Principal Lasalle Engineering

Richard Klinker, Principal Klinker & Associates, Inc.

James Noveh, Principal Jefferson Parish Fire Department

Michael Szmanda, Principal Certification & Training Corporation

Carl Wren, Principal Austin Fire Department

GUESTS PRESENT

NAME COMPANY Kevin Brinkman National Elevator Industry, Inc.

Jack McNamara Bosch

3. Approval of previous meeting minutes. The May 21, 2013 meeting minutes were

approved as written and distributed. The Chair also thanked Ray Grill for serving as

acting chair at the previous two meetings.

4. The process – staff PowerPoint presentation. Staff delivered a presentation on the first

draft meeting procedures; see the meeting agenda for the slide handout.

5. Correlating Committee minutes with direction for 2018 editions (information only). The Chair advised the BSF committee received no direction from the Correlating

Committees for the next editions of NFPA 101 or NFPA 5000. One item was erroneously

noted for BSF, however, it was intended for BSY (TC on Building Systems). No action.

Page 7 of 67

6. NFPA 101: Ch. 9 and NFPA 5000: Ch. 55 format review. The Chair reported he has

been reviewing the formatting of the noted chapters, specifically relating to fire alarm

system requirements. The order of provisions could stand to be revised for user-

friendliness. Global committee inputs were developed indicating the committee intends to

develop second revisions to editorially reorder portions of the fire alarm provisions so as

to follow a more logical order. Staff will work with the Chair between this and the next

meeting to draft revisions.

7. Fire alarm system notification in multiple-separated occupancies. The committee

reviewed staff correspondence (see agenda attachment) relating to general evacuation

alarm requirements in buildings consisting of multiple-separated occupancies. The

committee was unable to reach consensus and indicated there is no ‘one size fits all’

answer; the answer depends on the scenario. No code revisions were developed to

address the question.

8. NFPA 101 First Draft preparation. The committee resolved all public input to which it

was assigned and developed first revisions and committee input. See the NFPA 101 First

Draft Report for actions.

9. NFPA 5000 First Draft preparation. The committee resolved all public input to which

it was assigned and developed first revisions and committee input. See the NFPA 5000

First Draft Report for actions.

10. Other Business. The Chair appointed a task group to further review the first revisions

relating to mass notification systems and emergency communications systems. The task

group will report to the full committee at the upcoming second draft (public comment)

meeting. The task group members include: D. Finnegan (Chair); R. Grill; B. Hoskins;

Maria Marks, Siemens*; W. Moore; R. Roberts; L. Shudak; Jeff Van Kuren, Edwards-

UTC* (* denotes BLD/SAF-BSF nonmember).

11. Adjournment. The meeting adjourned at 1:45 PM, July 29, 2015.

Page 8 of 67

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 Second Draft Meetings

1

© National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA 101® & NFPA 5000 ®

Second Draft MeetingsCore Chapter Committees

June 20-23, 2016 - Fort Lauderdale, Florida

nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.

NFPA Second Draft Meeting

At this and all NFPA committee meetings we are concerned with your safety.

If the fire alarm sounds, please proceed to an exit.

2



3

Members, please verify/update your contact information.

Use of visual or audio recording devices capable of reproducing verbatim transcriptions of this or any NFPA meeting is not permitted.



Sign in and identify affiliations

Participation Requested 7 days prior to the meeting, or

At the discretion of the Chair

Guest chairs are located around the room

Equal opportunity granted to opposing views

4

Guests



Members categorized in ANY interest category who have been retained to represent the interests of ANOTHER interest category (with respect to a specific issue or issues that are to be addressed by a TC/CC) shall declare those interests to the committee and refrain from voting on any Public Input, Comment, or other matter relating to those issues throughout the process.

5 nfpa.org | © National Fire Protection Association. All rights reserved.


Follow Robert’s Rules of Order

Discussion requires a motion

6

General Procedures

Page 9 of 67


2



Not in order when another has the floor

Requires a second

This motion is not debatable and DOES NOT automatically stop debate

A 2/3 affirmative vote immediately closes debate and returns to the original motion on the floor

Fewer then 2/3 allows debate to continue

7

Motions for Ending Debate, Previous Question, or “Call the Question”



Member addresses the chair

Receives recognition from the chair

Introduces the motion

Another member seconds the motion

8

Committee member actions


NFPA Second Draft MeetingTimeline: Annual 2017 Revision Cycle

Comment Stage (Second Draft):Public Comment Closing Date: May 16, 2016Second Draft Meetings: June 20-23 and July 18-22, 2016Posting of Second Draft for Balloting Date: September 5, 2016Posting of Second Draft for NITMAM: January 16, 2017

Tech Session Preparation:NITMAM Closing Date: February 20, 2017NITMAM /CAM Posting Date: April 17, 2017NFPA Annual Meeting: June 4-7, 2017

Standards Council Issuance:Issuance of Documents with CAM: August 10, 2017



Resolving Public Comments

Committee Action and Committee Statement

Creating Second Revisions

10

Technical Committee Actions



Committee develops a Committee Action Accept

Reject but see…

Reject

Reject but Hold

(See Regs §4.4.8.1)

12

Resolving Public Comments

Page 10 of 67


3



Committee must clearly indicate reasons for not accepting the recommendation and/or point to a relevant Second Revision

All Public Comment actions must have a Committee Statement

Must include a valid technical reason

13

Committee Statements



No vague references to “intent”

Explain how the submitter’s substantiation is inadequate

Neither Public Comment actions nor Committee Statements get balloted

14

Committee Statements (continued)



No “new material” after the Public Input Stage since it is not subject to public review

What constitutes “new material” is decided by the TC or Correlating Committee

Adding “new material” at the Comments Stage could successfully be challenged through appeal to the NFPA Standards Council

15

New Material



Voting during meeting is used to establish a sense of agreement (simple majority)

Secured by letter ballot (≥2/3 agreement)

Only the results of the formal ballot determine the official position of the committee on the Second Draft

16

Formal Voting



Second Revisions (SRs) ONLY• Public Comment actions and Committee Statements not balloted

• Reference materials are available

Second Draft, Public Comments, First Draft Report

Allowed vote: • Affirmative on all SRs

• Affirmative on all SRs with exceptions specifically noted

Ballot form provides a column for affirmative with comment• Note: This box only needs to be checked if there is an accompanying comment

Reject or abstain requires a reason17

Ballots



Initial ballot

Circulation of negatives and comments

Members may change votes during circulation

Second Revision that fails letter ballot is designated as a Committee Comment in the Second Draft Report, marked as “Reject,” and not included in the Second Draft

18

Circulation

Page 11 of 67


4



• If a Second Revision fails ballot and the subject text was a result of a First Draft change, a Supplementary Ballot is issued

• Supplementary Ballot asks TC if it still favors the First Revision change reported in the First Draft

• If yes, same change appears as a Second Revision and is included in the Second Draft

• If no, the change appears as a Committee Comment and the text reverts to previous edition

• See Regs §4.4.10.2.119

Failed Second Revisions



Ballots are issued and submitted online

Alternates are strongly encouraged to return ballots

Ballot session will time out after 90 minutes

Use “submit” button to save your work

20

Electronic Balloting


Balloting

21

test ballot link



22

Click link on the ballot email

Sign in with NFPA.org Committee Login and Password



23

Select either ‘Affirmative All’ or ‘Affirmative with Exception(s)’



Use “See FR/SR - #” link to review all First/Second Revisions

Use “Edit election” to change individual votes or to modify vote after submitting ballot

24

Page 12 of 67


5



25

To complete ballot click Participant Consent and Submit

Return and edit any votes before ballot due date.


Legal

26

Antitrust Matters

It is the policy of the NFPA to strictly comply with state and federal antitrust laws.

NFPA expects all participants in its standards development activities to conduct themselves in strict accordance with these laws.

It is the obligation of each participant to read and understand NFPA’s Antitrust Policy. (You can access this policy at nfpa.org/regs.)


Legal

27

Antitrust Matters (cont’d)

Participants must avoid any conduct, conversation or agreement that would constitute an unreasonable restraint of trade.Conversation topics that are off limits include:

•Profit, margin, or cost data;•Prices, rates, or fees;•Selection, division or allocation of sales territories, markets or customers;•Refusal to deal with a specific business entity.


Legal

28

Antitrust Matters (cont’d)NFPA’s standards development activities are based on openness, honesty, fairness and balance.Participants must adhere to the Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA Standards and the Guide for the Conduct of Participants in the NFPA Standards Development Process. (You can access the Regulations and Guideat nfpa.org/regs.)Follow guidance and direction from your employer or other organization you may represent.Be sure to ask questions if you have them.


Legal

29

Manner is which standards development activity is conducted can be important.The Guide requires standards development activity to be conducted with openness, honesty and in good faith.Participants are not entitled to speak on behalf of NFPA.Participants must take appropriate steps to ensure their statements whether written or oral and regardless of the setting, are portrayed as personal opinions, not the position of NFPA.Be sure to ask questions if you have them.

Antitrust Matters (cont’d)


Legal

30

Patents

Disclosures of essential patent claims should be made by the patent holder.Patent disclosures should be made early in the process.Others may also notify NFPA if they believe that a proposed or existing NFPA standard includes an essential patent claim.NFPA has adopted and follows ANSI’s Patent Policy. It is the obligation of each participant to read and understand NFPA’s Patent Policy. (You can access this policy at nfpa.org/regs.)

Page 13 of 67


6

TC Struggles with an Issue

• TC needs data on a new technology or emerging issue

• Two opposing views on an issue with no real data

• Data presented is not trusted by committee

Code Fund Lends a Hand

• TC rep and/or staff liaison submits a Code Fund Request

• Requests are reviewed by a Panel and chosen based on need / feasibility

Research Project Carried Out

• Funding for project is provided by the Code Fund and/or industry sponsors

• Project is completed and data is available to TC

www.nfpa.org/codefund

About

• Document scope• Table of contents• Articles• Research and statistical

reports• Latest codes and

standards news on NFPA Today blog feed

• Free access

Current and Previous Editions

• Issued TIAs, FIs, Errata• Archived revision

information such as meeting and ballot information, First Draft Reports (previously ROPs), Second Draft Reports (previously ROCs), and Standards Council and NITMAM information

Next Edition

• Revision cycle schedule

• Posting & closing dates• Submit public

input/comments via electronic submission system.

• Meeting and ballot information

• First Draft Report and Second Draft Report

• NITMAM information• Standard Council

Decisions• Private TC info (*red

asterisk)• Ballot circulations,

informational ballots and other committee info

Technical Committee

• Committee name and staff liaison

• Committee scope and responsibility

• Committee list with private information

• Committee documents (codes & standards) in PDF format

• Committees seeking members

• Online committee membership application

Document Information Pages


Questions


Thank You

Page 14 of 67

Public Comment No. 195-NFPA 101-2016 [ New Section after 3.3 ]

3.3.X Deficiency.

For the purposes of inspection, testing, and maintenance of water-based fire protection systems, a condition that will or has the

potential to adversely impact the performance of a system or portion thereof but does not rise to the level of an impairment. [ 25,

2017]

3.3.X.X Critical Deficiency.

A deficiency that, if not corrected, can have a material effect on the ability of the fire protection system or unit to function as

intended in a fire event. [ 25, 2017]

3.3.X.X Noncritical Deficiency.

A deficiency that does not have a material effect on the ability of the fire protection system or unit to function in a fire event, but

correction is needed to meet the requirements of this standard or for the proper inspection, testing, and maintenance of the system

or unit. [ 25, 2017]

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Correlates to PC-193 and committee suggestions from the first draft to add definitions to NFPA 101, extracted from NFPA 25. Definitions of critical and non-critical deficiency along with impairments were added to NFPA 1 through FR135 and FR136.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 193-NFPA 101-2016 [New Section after 9.11.1]

Related Item

Public Input No. 416-NFPA 101-2015 [New Section after 4.6.12.1]

Public Input No. 418-NFPA 101-2015 [Section No. 9.11]

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name: Jeffrey Hugo

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Associ

Affilliation: NFSA

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon May 16 10:56:03 EDT 2016

Copyright Assignment

I, Jeffrey Hugo, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both theProposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of theNFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power andauthority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am Jeffrey Hugo, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. Iunderstand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as ahandwritten signature

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

1 of 1 6/1/2016 9:08 AM

Page 15 of 67

Public Comment No. 15-NFPA 101-2016 [ Section No. 9.6.3.7 ]

9.6.3.7

Audible alarm notification appliances shall comply with NFPA 72.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

101_CCN_15.pdf 101 CC Note #15


NOTE: This Public Comment appeared as CC Note No. 15 in the First Draft Report. The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BSF) to consider the Negative ballot of Larrimer so as to make clear that existing audible devices need not meet the requirements of the current edition of NFPA 72. The committee should retain the existing performance-based language (rather than deleting it as proposed in the FR) for applicability to existing appliance installations.

This action will be considered as a public comment.

Related Item

Correlating Committee Note No. 15-NFPA 101-2016 [Section No. 9.6.3.7]


Submitter Full Name: CC ON SAF_AAC

Organization: NFPA CC ON SAFETY TO LIFE

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 03 09:33:43 EST 2016

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

67 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 16 of 67

Correlating Committee Note No. 15-NFPA 101-2016 [ Section No. 9.6.3.7 ]


Submitter Full Name: SAF-AAC

Organization: [ Not Specified ]

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Jan 08 08:24:54 EST 2016

Committee Statement and Meeting Notes

CommitteeStatement:

The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BSF) to consider the Negative ballotof Larrimer so as to make clear that existing audible devices need not meet the requirements of the current edition of NFPA 72. Thecommittee should retain the existing performance-based language (rather than deleting it as proposed in the FR) for applicability toexisting appliance installations.


Ballot Results

This item has passed ballot

11 Eligible Voters

0 Not Returned

11 Affirmative All

0 Affirmative with Comments

0 Negative with Comments

0 Abstention

Affirmative All

Bush, Kenneth E.

Hopper, Howard

Hrustich, Stephen

Hugo, Jeffrey M.

Kalie, Jr., J. Edmund

Koffel, William E.

Pauls, Jake

Quiter, James R.

Reiswig, Rodger

Reynolds, Ronald C.

Rosenbaum, Eric R.


1 of 1 3/2/2016 12:33 PM

Page 17 of 67

First Revision No. 1003-NFPA 101-2015 [ Section No. 9.6.3.7 ]

9.6.3.7

Audible alarm notification appliances shall be of such character and so distributed as to be effectively heard above the average ambientsound level that exists under normal conditions of occupancy comply with NFPA 72 .


Submitter Full Name: SAF-BSF


Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Jul 29 12:25:24 EDT 2015


CommitteeStatement:

The existing language is too vague. There are more requirements in NFPA 72 that go beyond "just being able to hear" aboveambient conditions. There is the 110 max db language, the 105bd and greater requirement for visual notification, the min 15dbabove ambient in sleeping areas, etc. (From PI 27)

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 27-NFPA 101-2015 [Section No. 9.6.3.7]

Ballot Results


28 Eligible Voters

5 Not Returned

22 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Chen, Flora F.

Donga, Paul M.

Grill, Raymond A.

Noveh, James

Szmanda, Michael R.

Affirmative All

Bradley, Harry L.

Brinkman, Kevin L.

Brock, Pat D.

Dale, Stephen E.

Hagood, Claudia

Hammerberg, Thomas P.

Hugo, Jeffrey M.

Hutton, Claude O.

Jardin, Joseph M.

Kellett, Michael


1 of 2 5/26/2016 1:40 PM

Page 18 of 67

Killian, David A.

Klepitch, David L.

Lazarz, Daniel J.

Moore, Wayne D.

Panowitz, Scott E.

Reiswig, Rodger

Roberts, Richard Jay

Ruchala, Kurt A.

Shudak, Lawrence J.

Warner, Todd W.

Wren, Carl D.

Wyatt, David M.

Negative with Comment

Larrimer, Peter A.

The requirement for audible devices to comply with NFPA 72 is already covered in 9.6.1.3 and allows an exception for approved existing systems.This change can be interpreted to require existing audible devices to comply with NFPA 72. Existing devices may not comply with NFPA 72 butthey should comply with the verbiage that is being deleted, that is: Audible alarm notification appliances shall be of such character and sodistributed as to be effectively heard above the average ambient sound level that exists under normal conditions of occupancy. If the TC doesn'tlike that existing code language, then deleting 9.6.3.7 entirely would be better than making this change that effectively states the samerequirement as that in 9.6.1.3 without the exception for approved existing installations.

Editorial Comment

Click here


2 of 2 5/26/2016 1:40 PM

Page 19 of 67


9.6.3.7

Audible alarm notification appliances shall comply with NFPA 72 be of such character and so distributed as to be effectively heardabove the average ambient sound level that exists under normal conditions of occupancy .


The intent of this proposed code change is to return the subject Section text back to the original text in the 2015 edition of NFPA 101. The new language proposed by the Technical Committee will retroactively require all existing audible alarm notification appliances in buildings to meet all the requirements in NFPA 72. I believe this was not the intent of the Technical Committee.

Related Item

First Revision No. 1003-NFPA 101-2015 [Section No. 9.6.3.7]


Submitter Full Name: David Frable

Organization: US General Services Administration

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



68 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 20 of 67


9.6.3.7

?Audible alarm notification appliances shall

comply with NFPA 72be of such character and so distributed as to be effectively heard above the average ambient sound level that exists under normal conditionsof occupancy .


See the negative comment.

Related Item

First Revision No. 1003-NFPA 101-2015 [Section No. 9.6.3.7]


Submitter Full Name: Peter Larrimer

Organization: US Department of Veterans Affa

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 22 10:57:55 EDT 2016


69 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 21 of 67

Public Comment No. 193-NFPA 101-2016 [ New Section after 9.11.1 ]

Compliance

Whenever impairments, critical deficiencies, or non-critical deficiencies are identified in water-based fire protection systemsmaintained in accordance with NFPA 25, they shall be corrected in a time frame approved by the AHJ as required by Section 4.6.6.


The new text is similar to NFPA 1 FR135 and FR136. It establishes direction to the user for impairments, critical deficiencies, and non-critical deficiencies to comply with NFPA 25 and is correlated to NFPA 101 Section 4.6.6.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 195-NFPA 101-2016 [New Section after 3.3]

Related Item

Public Input No. 416-NFPA 101-2015 [New Section after 4.6.12.1]

Public Input No. 418-NFPA 101-2015 [Section No. 9.11]


Submitter Full Name: Jeffrey Hugo

Organization: National Fire Sprinkler Associ

Affilliation: NFSA

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



70 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 22 of 67

Public Comment No. 187-NFPA 101-2016 [ Section No. 9.11.4 ]

9.11.4* Integrated Systems Fire Protection and Life System Test .

Where required by Chapters 11 through 43, and where two or more fire protection or life safety systems are integrated with otherbuilding systems and equipment interconnected , the integrated systems shall be tested system test shall verify the proper operationand function of such systems in accordance with NFPA 4.


The intent of this proposal is to clarify when integrated testing of fire protection systems is required. The challenge in writing a specific requirement for testing of integrated systems is ensuring that required testing of integrated features is scaled in a manner that is reasonable for a wide range of applications. The revised language addresses this concern.

Related Item

First Revision No. 1007-NFPA 101-2015 [New Section after 9.11.3]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



71 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 23 of 67


Add New Section after 9.13



101_CCN_16.pdf 101 CC Note #16


NOTE: This Public Comment appeared as CC Note No. 16 in the First Draft Report. The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Fundamentals (FUN) and the occupancy committees (AXM, END, HEA, BCF, RES, DET, MER, IND) to review the proposed change and determine if further changes are needed in the Code. The Correlating Committee will revisit the scope of the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BSF) after they propose any desired changes.


Related Item

Correlating Committee Note No. 16-NFPA 101-2016 [New Section after 9.13]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



72 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 24 of 67

Correlating Committee Note No. 16-NFPA 101-2016 [ New Section after 9.13 ]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



CommitteeStatement:

The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Fundamentals (FUN) and the occupancy committees (AXM, END, HEA, BCF, RES,DET, MER, IND) to review the proposed change and determine if further changes are needed in the Code. The CorrelatingCommittee will revisit the scope of the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BSF) after they propose any desiredchanges.


Ballot Results


11 Eligible Voters

0 Not Returned

11 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Affirmative All

Bush, Kenneth E.

Hopper, Howard

Hrustich, Stephen

Hugo, Jeffrey M.


Koffel, William E.

Pauls, Jake

Quiter, James R.

Reiswig, Rodger

Reynolds, Ronald C.

Rosenbaum, Eric R.


1 of 1 3/2/2016 12:34 PM

Page 25 of 67

First Revision No. 1006-NFPA 101-2015 [ New Section after 9.13 ]

9.14 Risk Analysis for Mass Notification Systems.

9.14.1 Where Required.

Where required by Chapters 11 through 43 , a risk analysis for mass notification systems shall be provided in accordance with therequirements of NFPA 72 and the provisions of 9.14.2 through 9.14.4 .

9.14.2 Considerations.

The risk analysis required by 9.14.1 shall additionally address all of the following considerations:

(1) Fire and non-fire emergencies

(2) Specific nature and anticipated risks of each facility

(3) Characteristics of associated buildings, areas, spaces, campuses, equipment, and operations

9.14.3 Emergency Communications System.

An emergency communications system in accordance with NFPA 72 shall be provided where need for such is identified by the riskanalysis required by 9.14.1 , commensurate with the likelihood, vulnerability, magnitude, and potential consequences ofemergencies.

9.14.4 Emergency Action Plan.

The completed emergency action plan in accordance with Section 4.8 shall be used for the design of the massnotification/emergency communications system.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



CommitteeStatement:

This first revision seeks to provide a requirement to conduct a risk analysis and create an emergency action plan for occupancieswhere required by Chapters 11-43. The need for effective emergency communications in the United States came into sharp focus inthe 20th century in response to threats to homeland security and our educational occupancies. We have learned from the recentincidents that occurred in our college/university campuses, and other buildings, and have created installation guidelines to befollowed for life safety. [Aurora, CO. Theater 2012; Columbine 1999; Virginia Tech 2007; Sandy Hook 2012; WeatherTornadoes/Storms]. //

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) School Safety, Codes and Security Workshop was held December 3–4, 2014 inCollege Park, Maryland, and was sponsored and hosted by NFPA. The resulting report highlights the need for real timecommunication systems in appropriate occupancies. //

NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code, has a chapter dedicated to emergency communication systems. This containsthe detailed information on the risk analysis and emergency action plan as required in the above proposed sections. //

This is NOT intended to require a mass notification system. There are many elements contained within a mass notification system.The process of the risk analysis will outline what is needed based on risk and engineering study for the occupancy. It will be theresponsibility of the occupancy to react to the risk assessment. //

A task group has been appointed to further review the location of the proposed material in Ch. 9. The committee requests theCorrelating Committee review this action in conjunction with any related actions by the TC on Fundamentals and the occupancychapter committees to ensure the provisions are appropriately coordinated. The committee also requests the Correlating Committeereview the scope of the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment to recommend any needed changes to accommodatethe addition of the proposed language.

ResponseMessage:

Ballot Results


1 of 2 5/25/2016 3:56 PM

Page 26 of 67


28 Eligible Voters

5 Not Returned

22 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Chen, Flora F.

Donga, Paul M.

Grill, Raymond A.

Noveh, James

Szmanda, Michael R.

Affirmative All

Bradley, Harry L.

Brinkman, Kevin L.

Brock, Pat D.

Dale, Stephen E.

Hagood, Claudia


Hugo, Jeffrey M.

Hutton, Claude O.

Jardin, Joseph M.

Kellett, Michael

Killian, David A.

Klepitch, David L.

Lazarz, Daniel J.

Moore, Wayne D.

Panowitz, Scott E.

Reiswig, Rodger


Ruchala, Kurt A.

Shudak, Lawrence J.

Warner, Todd W.

Wren, Carl D.

Wyatt, David M.


Larrimer, Peter A.

As written, this is not ready to be accepted in the Life Safety Code. The text has numerous problems.

Editorial Comment

Click here


2 of 2 5/25/2016 3:56 PM

Page 27 of 67

Public Comment No. 110-NFPA 101-2016 [ Section No. 9.14 ]













See attachment for proposed changes.



Chapter_9_Risk_Assessment_Public_Comment_NFPA_Submittal_Ver2.docx Public Comment to FR 1006 from Dan Gauvin


The Risk Assessment in Section 9.14 should be applicable to Emergency Communication/Mass Notification Systems (both systems are addressed in NFPA 72 Chapter 24). Depending on the results of the risk analysis, either an emergency communication system or a mass notification system may sufficiently serve the need of the emergency action plan (and in some cases neither may be required).

A new section 9.14.1.2 has been added to clarify that the emergency communication/mass notification system is only needed where required by the results of the risk analysis (i.e. there are no prescriptive requirements for an emergency notification/mass notification system). The new 9.14.1.2 also replaces 9.14.3 in the first revision.

A new section 9.14.2 for Performance Design has been added. This section identifies the purpose of the risk analysis, the emergency communication/mass notification system, and the emergency communication/mass notification system emergency action plan that are necessary for identifying system design and performance requirements.

Section 9.14.2 (Considerations) from the first revision has been deleted. The public input language only identified a partial list of the considerations listed in NFPA 72 Chapter 24, and as such, this could be considered a conflict, or at the very least, create confusion between the two documents. The requirements in Section 9.14 for compliance with NFPA 72 Chapter 24 will automatically ensure all considerations will be consistently referenced.

A new section 9.14.3 has been added to identify the documentation requirements, who is responsible for the documents, and the requirement for the required documentation to be submitted to the AHJ. Without these requirements this section would be difficult to enforce.

Where applicable, references to NFPA 72 have been changed to NFPA 72, Chapter 24 (this is the NFPA 72 chapter reference for Emergency Communications Systems which also includes Mass Notification Systems).

Related Item

First Revision No. 1006-NFPA 101-2015 [New Section after 9.13]


Submitter Full Name: Daniel Gauvin

Organization: Tyco Fire Suppression & Building Products

Street Address:

City:

State:


73 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 28 of 67

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Apr 20 15:13:04 EDT 2016


74 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 29 of 67

Proposed Public Comment to NFPA 101 First Revision 1006-NFPA 101-2015

9.14 Risk Analysis for Mass NotificationEmergency Communication/Mass Notification Systems.


9.14.1.1 Where required by Chapters 11 through 43, a risk analysis for emergency communication/mass notification systems shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 72, Chapter 24 and the provisions of 9.14.2 through 9.14.49.14.3.

9.14.1.2 Where required by the risk analysis in 9.14.1.1, the emergency communication/mass notification system shall be in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 72, Chapter 24.






9.14.2 Performance Design.

9.14.2.1 The purpose of the risk analysis for the emergency communication/mass notification system shall be to limit or control the consequences, extent, or severity of incidents and scenarios of concern identified through a risk analysis.

9.14.2.2 The purpose of the emergency communication/mass notification system shall be to communicate information about emergencies including, but not limited to, fire, human-caused events (accidental and intentional), other dangerous situations, accidents, and natural disasters.

9.14.2.3 The purpose of the emergency action plan for the emergency communication/mass notification system shall be to identify the emergency communication/mass notification system design and performance requirements in accordance with the results of the risk analysis.

9.14.3 Documentation

9.14.3.1 The emergency action plan, risk assessment report, and accompanying documentation shall be submitted to the authority having jurisdiction by the registered design professional (RDP). The format and content of the documentation shall be acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction.

9.14.3.2* Where required by the authority having jurisdiction, an independent review of the emergency action plan, risk assessment, and the accompanying documentation by one or more individuals possessing expertise in risk characterization for accidental and intentional hazards shall be performed.

A.9.14.3.2 These peer reviews should focus on the assumptions and methods of analysis used and on the findings. Peer reviewers should submit written assessment reports to the AHJ.


An emergency communications system in accordance with NFPA 72 shall be provided where need for such is identified by the risk analysis required by 9.14.1, commensurate with the likelihood, vulnerability, magnitude, and potential consequences of emergencies.


The completed emergency action plan in accordance with Section 4.8 shall be used for the design of the mass notification/emergency communications system.

Page 30 of 67















The intent of this proposed code change is to delete the proposed First Revision. The Technical Committee statement focusses on educational type occupancies; however, the proposal could cover every type of occupancy classification. In addition, the proposed text is poorly written and it also appears to contradict some requirements in NFPA 72 regarding the risk analysis, the design of the system, and the buildings emergency action plan.

Last but not least, at this time it is felt that mandating a risk analysis be conducted for every project to determine the appropriate way to provide information and instructions to people in a building(s) or outdoor spaces for every possible event (threat/emergency) condition is not the best way to proceed at this time. From a cost standpoint, it appears that to conduct a risk analysis of this magnitude prior to installing a new fire alarm system in a building will be very expensive. Therefore, until more cost data and experience is brought forth, it is recommended that a new Annex be developed so that it can be used on a voluntary basis by building owners and developers who might have a desire to install a mass notification system in their projects. (see code change that proposes new Annex C).

Related Item





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



75 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 31 of 67


9.14

Risk Analysis forMass Notification

Systems.


WhereSystem . Where required by Chapters 11 through 43 , a

risk analysis formass notification

systemssystem shall be

provideddesigned, installed, inspected, tested and maintained in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 72 and the provisions of 9.14.

21 through 9.14.

42 .

9.14.

2 Considerations.






An emergency communications system in accordance with NFPA 72 shall be provided where need for such is identified by the riskanalysis required by 9.14.1 , commensurate with the likelihood, vulnerability, magnitude, and potential consequences of emergencies1 A risk analysis for the mass notification system shall be performed in accordance with the requirements in NFPA 72 to determine thenecessary emergency communication performance means needed for the specific project based on the occupant needs and potentialnatural, human, and technological caused events .

9.14.

4 Emergency Action Plan. The completed emergency action plan in accordance with Section 4.8 shall be used for the1.1 The risk analysis shall also be used as the basis for the development of the emergency communication provisions of the facilityemergency response plan.

9.14.2 The design of the mass notification

/emergency communications systemsystem shall be based on the risk analysis for the specified mass notification system .



FR_1006_-_Mass_Notification_Chapter_9_.docx


This is the third related proposal on this subject matter. FR 1006, Risk Analysis for Mass Notification Systems has been deleted and replaced with New Section 9.14, Mass Notification System. This proposed revision addresses the process for installing a mass notification system in a building. In addition, the proposed text in FR 1006 is poorly written and it also appears to contradict some requirements in NFPA 72 regarding the risk analysis, the design of the system, and the buildings emergency action plan. Therefore, the Section was revised to include a reference to NFPA 72 regarding the design, installation, inspection, testing, and maintenance requirements as well as a risk analysis performed in accordance with the requirement s in NFPA 72 a mass notiification system. Proposed new Section 9.14 is needed for coordination with new Sections 38.2.2.2 and 11.8.5.

__________________________________________________________________

New: 38.4.2.2 High rise buildings more than 420 feet above grade plane with an occupant load greater than 5,000 shall be provided with a mass notification system in accordance with Section 11.8.5.


76 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 32 of 67

New: 11.8.5 Mass Notification System.11.8.5.1 A mass notification system shall be in accordance with the requirements in Section 9.14.

Related Item


Committee Input No. 5508-NFPA 101-2015 [New Section after 38.3.4.4]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



77 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 33 of 67

First Revision No. 1006-NFPA 101-2015 [ New Section after 9.13 ] 9.14 Risk Analysis for Mass Notification Systems. 9.14.1 Where Required. Where required by Chapters 11 through 43 , a risk analysis for mass notification systems shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 72 and the provisions of 9.14.2 through 9.14.4 . 9.14.2 Considerations. The risk analysis required by 9.14.1 shall additionally address all of the following considerations: (1) Fire and non-fire emergencies (2) Specific nature and anticipated risks of each facility (3) Characteristics of associated buildings, areas, spaces, campuses, equipment, and operations 9.14.3 Emergency Communications System. An emergency communications system in accordance with NFPA 72 shall be provided where need for such is identified by the risk analysis required by 9.14.1, commensurate with the likelihood, vulnerability, magnitude, and potential consequences of emergencies. 9.14.4 Emergency Action Plan. The completed emergency action plan in accordance with Section 4.8 shall be used for the design of the mass notification/emergency communications system. First Revision No. 1006-NFPA 101-2015 [ New Section after 9.13 ] 9.14 Mass Notification System. Where required by Chapters 11 through 43, a mass notification system shall be designed, installed, inspected, tested and maintained in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 72 and the provisions of 9.14.1 through 9.14.2. 9.14.1 A risk analysis for the mass notification system shall be performed in accordance with the requirements in NFPA 72 to determine the necessary emergency communication performance means needed for the specific project based on the occupant needs and potential natural, human, and technological caused events. 9.14.1.1 The risk analysis shall also be used as the basis for the development of the emergency communication provisions of the facility emergency response plan. 9.14.2 The design of the mass notification system shall be based on the risk analysis for the specified mass notification system.

Page 34 of 67















This section was added to hastily at the First Revision stage. Unless it is more specific to what is intended, it should not be added to the Life Safety Code until more work is done on the verbiage. The deaths that occurred due at the incidents mentioned in the committee statement (Aurora, CO. Theater 2012; Columbine 1999; Virginia Tech 2007; Sandy Hook 2012) would not have been reduced in any way by adding the requirements to do a risk analysis even if a mass notification system was added as a result. This adds a lot of requirements but doesn't reduce the casualties.

In addition, a requirement to perform a risk analysis to address all non-fire emergencies is over the top for the Life Safety Code. How does one practically determine whether or not a shooting or a bombing is going to occur on their property and once these requirements are added, how does one argue that it isn’t going to occur from a liability standpoint? Newly added section 9.14.4 requires the use of the emergency action plan in accordance with 4.8 to be used for the mass notification system, but the emergency action plan in 4.8 is not mandated unless an occupancy chapter requires it to be included. Additionally, the emergency action plan in 4.8 covers much more than the notification system. If mass notification is to be included in the Life Safety Code, it should be included as a component of the emergency action plan in 4.8. Section 4.8.2 items 1, 2, 3, and 6 cover the components that should be used as a basis for the mass notification system.

4.8.2 Plan Requirements.4.8.2.1* Emergency action plans shall include the following:(1) Procedures for reporting of emergencies(2) Occupant and staff response to emergencies(3)*Evacuation, relocation, and shelter-in-place proceduresappropriate to the building, its occupancy, emergencies,and hazards(4) Appropriateness of the use of elevators(5) Design and conduct of fire drills(6) Type and coverage of building fire protection systems(7) Other items required by the authority having jurisdiction

Not requiring a risk analysis will not make buildings less safe and adding a mass notification system will not prevent a bombing or a shooting incident.

Related Item



Submitter Full Name: Peter Larrimer

Organization: US Department of Veterans Affa

Street Address:

City:


78 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 35 of 67

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 22 11:16:54 EDT 2016


79 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 36 of 67


14.3.4.4 Carbon Monoxide Detection Systems.

14.3.4.4.1

Carbon monoxide detectors in accordance with Section 9.12 shall be provided in new educational occupancies in the locations specifiedas follows:

(1) Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed on the ceilings of rooms containing permanently installed fuel-burning appliances.

(2) Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed centrally located within occupiable spaces served by the first supply air register from apermanently installed, fuel-burning HVAC system.

(3) Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed centrally located within occupiable spaces adjacent to a communicating attachedgarage.

(4) Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed centrally located within occupiable spaces adjacent to an attached garage with aseparation wall constructed of gypsum wallboard.

14.3.4.4.2

Where carbon monoxide detectors are installed in accordance with 14.3.4.4.1(1), the alarm signal shall be automatically transmitted toan approved on-site location or to an off-premises location in accordance with NFPA 720.

14.3.4.4.3

Carbon monoxide detectors as specified in 14.3.4.4.1 shall not be required in the following locations:

(1) Garages

(2) Occupiable spaces with communicating attached garages that are open parking structures as defined in 3.3.276.7.4

(3) Occupiable spaces with communicating attached garages that are mechanically ventilated in accordance with the applicablemechanical code

(4) Occupiable spaces that are separated from attached garages by walls constructed of gypsum wallboard where the garage is anopen parking structure as defined in 3.3.276.7.4

(5) Occupiable spaces that are separated from attached garages by walls constructed of gypsum wallboard where the garage ismechanically ventilated in accordance with the mechanical code



101_CCN_24.pdf 101 CC Note #24 ✓


NOTE: This Public Comment appeared as CC Note No. 24 in the First Draft Report. The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BSF) to consider the Affirmative with Comment ballot of Stashak and the Negative ballot of Shirey so as to revise Section 9.12 CO Detection and Warning Equipment to provide guidance to the various occupancy technical committees on installation and listing standards for CO detection devices in other than residential living units.


Related Item





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



1 of 2 6/1/2016 10:23 AM

Page 37 of 67


I, CC ON SAF_AAC, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including boththe Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of theNFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power andauthority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am CC ON SAF_AAC, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. Iunderstand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as ahandwritten signature


2 of 2 6/1/2016 10:23 AM

Page 38 of 67





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



CommitteeStatement:

The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BSF) to consider the Affirmativewith Comment ballot of Stashak and the Negative ballot of Shirey so as to revise Section 9.12 CO Detection and WarningEquipment to provide guidance to the various occupancy technical committees on installation and listing standards for COdetection devices in other than residential living units.


Ballot Results


11 Eligible Voters

0 Not Returned

11 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Affirmative All

Bush, Kenneth E.

Hopper, Howard

Hrustich, Stephen

Hugo, Jeffrey M.


Koffel, William E.

Pauls, Jake

Quiter, James R.

Reiswig, Rodger

Reynolds, Ronald C.

Rosenbaum, Eric R.


1 of 1 3/2/2016 12:44 PM

Page 39 of 67


14.3.4.4 Carbon Monoxide Alarms and Carbon Monoxide Detection Systems.

Global FR-2035

14.3.4.4.1

Carbon monoxide alarms or carbon monoxide detectors in accordance with Section 9.12 shall be provided in new educationaloccupancies in the locations specified as follows:

(1) On Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed on the ceilings of rooms containing permanently installed fuel-burningappliances .

(2) Centrally Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed centrally located within occupiable spaces served by the first supply airregister from a permanently installed, fuel-burning HVAC system .

(3) Centrally Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed centrally located within occupiable spaces adjacent to a communicatingattached garage .

(4) Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed centrally located within occupiable spaces adjacent to an attached garage with aseparation wall constructed of gypsum wallboard.

14.3.4.4.2

Where carbon monoxide detectors are installed in accordance with 14.3.4.4.1(1) , the alarm signal shall be automatically transmittedto an approved on-site location or to an off-premises location in accordance with NFPA 720 .

Global FR-2035

14.3.4.4.3

Carbon monoxide alarms and carbon monoxide detectors as specified in 14.3.4.4.1 shall not be required in the following locations:

(1) Garages



(4) Occupiable spaces that are separated from attached garages by walls constructed of gypsum wallboard where the garage is anopen parking structure as defined in 3.3.276.7.4

(5) Occupiable spaces that are separated from attached garages by walls constructed of gypsum wallboard where the garage ismechanically ventilated in accordance with the mechanical code


Submitter Full Name: SAF-END


Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Sep 01 12:19:24 CDT 2015


CommitteeStatement:

This First Revision seeks to ensure that the carbon monoxide audible alarm and trouble signal will be heard so that appropriateaction will be taken.

The objective of installing carbon monoxide detection/notification devices in occupied spaces is to wake/alert occupants so they canexit the premises. However, installations in furnace or boiler rooms, as is required by 14.3.4.4.1(1) should be designed so that aresponsible party can take immediate action if a fuel –burning appliance malfunctions, potentially spreading carbon monoxidethroughout the occupancy. Such rooms are often not regularly staffed. Therefore, the notification in such installations should soundin a constantly attended location, so that action can be taken quickly.

The term "carbon monoxide alarms" is being deleted as listing of such devices per UL 2034 is only for dwelling units. Systemdetectors are listed to UL 2075.


1 of 3 6/1/2016 10:18 AM

Page 40 of 67

ResponseMessage:

Committee Notes:

Date Submitted By

Sep 2, 2015 Ron Cote Editor: FR-2035 and this FR-2030 were created to permit changes to same code text to be balloted separately.



Ballot Results


24 Eligible Voters

2 Not Returned

18 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Hopper, Howard

Upton, Billy E.

Affirmative All

Aaby, Mark J.

Biddle, Judy

Dannaway, Samuel S.

Day, Richard L.

Dubrowski, Victor L.

Frangiamore, Keith S.

Gandy, Max L.

Haidacher, Jeffrey L.

Kasmauskas, Dominick G.

Lazebnik, Rosa

Longhitano, Alfred J.

Marks, Maria B.

Merck, Richard E.

Roeper, Kurt A.

Savage, Sr., Michael L.

Sinsigalli, Michael L.

Szachnowicz, Aleksy L.

Wolf, Ann Marie A.

Affirmative with Comment

Stashak, Catherine L.

The State of Illinois is dealing with this situation right now. We are requiring CO detection in new and existing public schools and there is no ULlisted battery powered CO alarm that is listed for a non-residential application. UL 2075 deal with commercial CO alarms but the criteria fortriggering a 2075 CO alarm is geared to compliance with OSHA/NIOSH requirements for employees that are working in a CO environment, just asdriving a forklift truck and measured on an 8 hour time-weighted approach. UL 2034 is the listing for residential CO alarms, but they "behave andrespond" more like we would like to see in a school. It alarms when something is broken and there is a leak. The PPM trigger is a little higher (toprevent false alarms), but it is low enough that occupants can respond to the alarm and evacuate. 2034 also alleviates alarms for short spikes ofCO. New York City, the State of Virginia, and the State of California all require CO detection in commercial areas and when a battery operatedalarm is permitted, the reference is to UL 2034. Even though the 2034 listing is for residential, we like their response in the school setting. Howshould the committee deal with this?


2 of 3 6/1/2016 10:18 AM

Page 41 of 67


Mertens, Matthew J.

While this proposal has great merit, I find it flawed to a fault. The directed locations of the CO installations can be contrary to manufacturersinstallation instructions/ listings. Additionally, very large rooms adjacent to parking with a centrally located detector may be likely outside theeffectiveness desired. Lastly, While exceptions for open and mechanically ventilated parking garages is common in the code world, given the dataprovided indicating migration of the CO through drywall the requirement should stand on its own. The reality is that in many situations (especiallyin cold climates) mechanical ventilation is defeated by residents to conserve heat and/or subject to failure without notice which is when thisdetection is most important. Open parking areas are a more reasonable exception, but even here weather conditions can have a negative effect.

Shirey, Jeffrey

I am unable to find sufficient data on UL Listed carbon monoxide detectors outside the home setting. The installation of these detectors anywhereelse may negate the UL Listing.

Wassom, Mark S.

Single station carbon monoxide alarms should not be removed from the standard. There are cases where they make more sense than a fulldetection system. Single station alarms can be interconnected to avoid the unoccupied space condition. UL 2034 covers single and multiplestation CO alarms intended for residential applications, but is not limited to residential applications.

Editorial Comment

Click here


3 of 3 6/1/2016 10:18 AM

Page 42 of 67

Public Comment No. 191-NFPA 101-2016 [ Section No. A.9.11.4 ]

A.9.11.4

It is also recommended that Please note that NFPA 4 requires that integrated fire protection and life safety systems becommissioned in accordance with NFPA 3 periodically re-tested as specified in the integrated system test plan. In addition, forexisting systems, an integrated system test plan must be developed within 5 years of adoption of NFPA 4 .


The current proposed annex language refers to NFPA 3, Recommended Practice for Commissioning of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems as annex material for integrated fire protection and life safety system testing. However, it is our belief that referencing NFPA 3 is not germane to the subject matter. The subject new proposed annex language is more appropriate for integrated fire protection and life safety system testing.

Related Item

First Revision No. 1007-NFPA 101-2015 [New Section after 9.11.3]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



242 of 259 5/17/2016 9:43 AM

Page 43 of 67

Public Comment No. 197-NFPA 101-2016 [ New Section after B.4 ]

TITLE OF NEW CONTENT

Annex C - Mass Notification System

This annex is not a part of the requirements of this NFPA document but is included for informational purposes only. Information in thisannex is intended to be adopted by the jurisdiction at the discretion of the adopting jurisdiction. Additionally, information in this annex isintended to be incorporated on a voluntary basis by building owners and developers who might have a desire to install a mass notificationsystem in their projects.

Although this annex is written in mandatory language, it is not intended to be enforced or applied unless specifically adopted by thejurisdiction or, if it is being applied on a voluntary basis, by the building owner or developer.

C.1 General

C.1.1 Definitions

C.1.1.1 In-Building Mass Notification System . A system used to provide information and instructions to people in a building(s) or otherspace using intelligible voice communications and including visible signals, text, graphics, tactile, or other communication methods.

C.1.1.2 Wide-Area Mass Notification System. Wide-area mass notification systems are generally installed to provide real-timeinformation to outdoor areas and could have the capability to communicate with other notification systems provided for a campus, militarybase, municipality, or similar single or multiple contiguous areas.

C.1.1.3 Risk Analysis. A process to characterize the likelihood, vulnerability, and magnitude of incidents associated with natural,technological, and man-made disasters and other emergencies that address scenarios of concern, their probability, and their potentialconsequences.

C.2 Scope. Mass notification systems shall be designed, installed, inspected, tested and maintained in accordance with the requirementsin NFPA 72.

C.3. Risk Analysis for mass notification system . A risk analysis for the mass notification system shall be performed in accordance withthe requirements in NFPA 72 to determine the necessary emergency communication performance means needed for the specific projectbased on the occupant needs and potential natural, human, and technological caused events.

C.3.1 The risk analysis shall also be used as the basis for the development of the emergency communication provisions that are includedin the facility emergency response plan.

C.4. Design. The system design of the mass notification system shall be based on the risk analysis.

C.5. Reserved


The intent of this proposed code change is to provide information in an annex that can be used on a voluntary basis by building owners and developers who might have a desire to install a mass notification system in their projects. At this time it is felt that mandating a risk analysis be conducted for every project to determine the appropriate way to provide information and instructions to people in a building(s) or outdoor spaces for every possible threat/emergency condition is not the best way to proceed at this time. From a cost standpoint, it appears that to conduct a risk analysis of this magnitude prior to installing a new fire alarm system in a building will be very expensive. Therefore, until more cost data and experience is brought forth, it is recommended that it be considered to be annex material so that it can be used on a voluntary basis by building owners and developers who might have a desire to install a mass notification system in their projects.

Cannot support FR 1006 as currently written.

Related Item





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



1 of 2 6/1/2016 9:09 AM

Page 44 of 67


I, David Frable, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both theProposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of theNFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power andauthority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am David Frable, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. Iunderstand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as ahandwritten signature


2 of 2 6/1/2016 9:09 AM

Page 45 of 67


55.2.3.7

Audible alarm notification appliances shall comply with NFPA 72.



5000_CCN_37.pdf 5000 CC Note # 37


NOTE: This Public Comment appeared as CC Note #37 in the First Draft Report. The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BSF) to consider the Negative ballot of Larrimer so as to make clear that existing audible devices need not meet the requirements of the current edition of NFPA 72. The committee should retain the existing performance-based language (rather than deleting it as proposed in the FR) for applicability to existing appliance installations.


Related Item



Submitter Full Name: CC on BLD_AAC

Organization: NFPA CC ON BUILDING CODE

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Mar 07 13:54:02 EST 2016


160 of 185 5/17/2016 1:23 PM

Page 46 of 67



Submitter Full Name: BLD-AAC


Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



CommitteeStatement:

The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BSF) to consider the Negative ballotof Larrimer so as to make clear that existing audible devices need not meet the requirements of the current edition of NFPA 72. Thecommittee should retain the existing performance-based language (rather than deleting it as proposed in the FR) for applicability toexisting appliance installations.


Ballot Results


18 Eligible Voters

2 Not Returned

15 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Newman, Michael T.

Wooldridge, Jerry

Affirmative All

DiCristina, Salvatore

Frable, David W.

Francis, Sam W.

Hansen, Raymond N.

Harrington, John C.

Hopper, Howard

Hugo, Jeffrey M.

Humble, Jonathan

Jones, Gerald H.

Leavitt, Russell B.

Quiter, James R.


Shah, Faimeen

Vinci, Leon F.

Willse, Peter J.



1 of 2 3/2/2016 2:24 PM

Page 47 of 67


9.6.3.7

Audible alarm notification appliances shall be of such character and so distributed as to be effectively heard above the average ambientsound level that exists under normal conditions of occupancy comply with NFPA 72 .




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



CommitteeStatement:

The existing language is too vague. There are more requirements in NFPA 72 that go beyond "just being able to hear" aboveambient conditions. There is the 110 max db language, the 105bd and greater requirement for visual notification, the min 15dbabove ambient in sleeping areas, etc. (From PI 27)

ResponseMessage:


Ballot Results


28 Eligible Voters

5 Not Returned

22 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Chen, Flora F.

Donga, Paul M.

Grill, Raymond A.

Noveh, James

Szmanda, Michael R.

Affirmative All

Bradley, Harry L.

Brinkman, Kevin L.

Brock, Pat D.

Dale, Stephen E.

Hagood, Claudia


Hugo, Jeffrey M.

Hutton, Claude O.

Jardin, Joseph M.

Kellett, Michael


1 of 2 5/26/2016 1:40 PM

Page 48 of 67

Killian, David A.

Klepitch, David L.

Lazarz, Daniel J.

Moore, Wayne D.

Panowitz, Scott E.

Reiswig, Rodger


Ruchala, Kurt A.

Shudak, Lawrence J.

Warner, Todd W.

Wren, Carl D.

Wyatt, David M.


Larrimer, Peter A.

The requirement for audible devices to comply with NFPA 72 is already covered in 9.6.1.3 and allows an exception for approved existing systems.This change can be interpreted to require existing audible devices to comply with NFPA 72. Existing devices may not comply with NFPA 72 butthey should comply with the verbiage that is being deleted, that is: Audible alarm notification appliances shall be of such character and sodistributed as to be effectively heard above the average ambient sound level that exists under normal conditions of occupancy. If the TC doesn'tlike that existing code language, then deleting 9.6.3.7 entirely would be better than making this change that effectively states the samerequirement as that in 9.6.1.3 without the exception for approved existing installations.

Editorial Comment

Click here


2 of 2 5/26/2016 1:40 PM

Page 49 of 67

Laramee, Scott T.

Clarify that that existing audible devices need not meet the requirements of the current edition of NFPA 72. It is recommended that the existingperformance-based language be retained for its applicability to existing installations.


2 of 2 3/2/2016 2:24 PM

Page 50 of 67


17.3.4.4 Carbon Monoxide Detection Systems.

17.3.4.4.1


(1) Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed on the ceilings of rooms containing permanently installed fuel-burning appliances

(2) Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed centrally located within occupiable spaces served by the first supply air register from apermanently installed, fuel-burning HVAC system

(3) Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed centrally located within occupiable spaces adjacent to a communicating attachedgarage

(4) Carbon monoxide detectors shall be centrally located within occupiable spaces adjacent to an attached garage with a separationwall constructed of gypsum wallboard.

17.3.4.4.2

Where carbon monoxide detectors are installed in accordance with 17.3.4.4.1(1), the alarm signal shall be automatically transmitted toan approved on-site location or to an off-premises location in accordance with NFPA 720.

17.3.4.4.3

Carbon monoxide detectors as specified in 17.3.4.4.1 shall not be required in the following locations:

(1) Garages



(4) Occupiable spaces that are separated from attached garages by walls constructed of gypsum wallboard where the garage is anopen parking structure as defined in 3.3.633.11.4.

(5) Occupiable spaces that are separated from attached garages by walls constructed of gypsum wallboard where the garage ismechanically ventilated in accordance with the mechanical code.



5000_CCN_23.pdf 5000 CC Note #23 ✓


NOTE: This Public Comment appeared as CC Note No. 23 in the First Draft Report. The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BSF) to consider the Affirmative with Comment ballot of Stashak and the Negative ballot of Shirey so as to revise Section 55.11 CO Detection and Warning Equipment to provide guidance to the various occupancy technical committees on installation and listing standards for CO detection devices in other than residential living units.


Related Item





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



1 of 2 6/1/2016 10:54 AM

Page 51 of 67


I, CC on BLD_AAC, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both theProposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of theNFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power andauthority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am CC on BLD_AAC, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. Iunderstand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as ahandwritten signature


2 of 2 6/1/2016 10:54 AM

Page 52 of 67





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



CommitteeStatement:

The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BSF) to consider the Affirmativewith Comment ballot of Stashak and the Negative ballot of Shirey so as to revise Section 55.11 CO Detection and WarningEquipment to provide guidance to the various occupancy technical committees on installation and listing standards for COdetection devices in other than residential living units.


Ballot Results


18 Eligible Voters

2 Not Returned

15 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Newman, Michael T.

Wooldridge, Jerry

Affirmative All


Frable, David W.

Francis, Sam W.

Hansen, Raymond N.

Harrington, John C.

Hopper, Howard

Hugo, Jeffrey M.

Humble, Jonathan

Jones, Gerald H.

Leavitt, Russell B.

Quiter, James R.


Shah, Faimeen

Vinci, Leon F.

Willse, Peter J.



1 of 2 3/2/2016 2:12 PM

Page 53 of 67

Laramee, Scott T.

No comment, but no way to accept as "affirmative" without accepting all as "affirmative in the ballot portal.


2 of 2 3/2/2016 2:12 PM

Page 54 of 67


17.3.4.4 Carbon Monoxide Alarms and Carbon Monoxide Detection Systems.

Detail FR-3002

17.3.4.4.1


(1) On Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed on the ceilings of rooms containing permanently installed fuel-burningappliances

(2) Centrally Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed centrally located within occupiable spaces served by the first supply airregister from a permanently installed, fuel-burning HVAC system

(3) Centrally Carbon monoxide detectors shall be installed centrally located within occupiable spaces adjacent to a communicatingattached garage

(4) Carbon monoxide detectors shall be centrally located within occupiable spaces adjacent to an attached garage with a separationwall constructed of gypsum wallboard.

17.3.4.4.2

Where carbon monoxide detectors are installed in accordance with 17.3.4.4.1(1) , the alarm signal shall be automatically transmittedto an approved on-site location or to an off-premises location in accordance with NFPA 720 .

Detail FR-3002

17.3.4.4.3

Carbon monoxide alarms and carbon monoxide detectors as specified in 17.3.4.4.1 shall not be required in the following locations:

(1) Garages



(4) Occupiable spaces that are separated from attached garages by walls constructed of gypsum wallboard where the garage is anopen parking structure as defined in 3.3.633.11.4 .

(5) Occupiable spaces that are separated from attached garages by walls constructed of gypsum wallboard where the garage ismechanically ventilated in accordance with the mechanical code.


Submitter Full Name: BLD-END


Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Sep 02 07:36:11 CDT 2015


CommitteeStatement:

This First Revision seeks to ensure that the carbon monoxide audible alarm and trouble signal will be heard so that appropriateaction will be taken.

The objective of installing carbon monoxide detection/notification devices in occupied spaces is to wake/alert occupants so they canexit the premises. However, installations in furnace or boiler rooms, as is required by 17.3.4.4.1(1) should be designed so that aresponsible party can take immediate action if a fuel –burning appliance malfunctions, potentially spreading carbon monoxidethroughout the occupancy. Such rooms are often not regularly staffed. Therefore, the notification in such installations should soundin a constantly attended location, so that action can be taken quickly.

The term "carbon monoxide alarms" is being deleted as listing of such devices per UL 2034 is only for dwelling units. Systemdetectors are listed to UL 2075.

Committee Notes:


1 of 3 6/1/2016 10:49 AM

Page 55 of 67

Date Submitted By

Sep 2, 2015 Ron Cote Editor: FR-3002 and this FR-3001 were created to permit changes to same code text to be balloted separately.


Ballot Results


24 Eligible Voters

2 Not Returned

18 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Hopper, Howard

Upton, Billy E.

Affirmative All

Aaby, Mark J.

Biddle, Judy

Dannaway, Samuel S.

Day, Richard L.

Dubrowski, Victor L.

Frangiamore, Keith S.

Haidacher, Jeffrey L.

Jenkins, Christopher M.

Kasmauskas, Dominick G.

Lazebnik, Rosa

Longhitano, Alfred J.

Marks, Maria B.

Merck, Richard E.

Roeper, Kurt A.

Savage, Sr., Michael L.

Sinsigalli, Michael L.

Szachnowicz, Aleksy L.

Wolf, Ann Marie A.


Stashak, Catherine L.

The State of Illinois is dealing with this situation right now. We are requiring CO detection in new and existing public schools and there is no ULlisted battery powered CO alarm that is listed for a non-residential application. UL 2075 deal with commercial CO alarms but the criteria fortriggering a 2075 CO alarm is geared to compliance with OSHA/NIOSH requirements for employees that are working in a CO environment, just asdriving a forklift truck and measured on an 8 hour time-weighted approach. UL 2034 is the listing for residential CO alarms, but they "behave andrespond" more like we would like to see in a school. It alarms when something is broken and there is a leak. The PPM trigger is a little higher (toprevent false alarms), but it is low enough that occupants can respond to the alarm and evacuate. 2034 also alleviates alarms for short spikes ofCO. New York City, the State of Virginia, and the State of California all require CO detection in commercial areas and when a battery operatedalarm is permitted, the reference is to UL 2034. Even though the 2034 listing is for residential, we like their response in the school setting. Howshould the committee deal with this?


Mertens, Matthew J.

While this proposal has great merit, I find it flawed to a fault. The directed locations of the CO installations can be contrary to manufacturersinstallation instructions/ listings. Additionally, very large rooms adjacent to parking with a centrally located detector may be likely outside the


2 of 3 6/1/2016 10:49 AM

Page 56 of 67

effectiveness desired. Lastly, While exceptions for open and mechanically ventilated parking garages is common in the code world, given the dataprovided indicating migration of the CO through drywall the requirement should stand on its own. The reality is that in many situations (especiallyin cold climates) mechanical ventilation is defeated by residents to conserve heat and/or subject to failure without notice which is when thisdetection is most important. Open parking areas are a more reasonable exception, but even here weather conditions can have a negative effect.

Shirey, Jeffrey

I am unable to find sufficient data on UL Listed carbon monoxide detectors outside the home setting. The installation of these detectors anywhereelse may negate the UL Listing.

Wassom, Mark S.

Single station carbon monoxide alarms should not be removed from the code. There are cases where they make more sense than a full detectionsystem. Single station alarms can be interconnected to avoid the unoccupied space condition. UL 2034 covers single and multiple station COalarms intended for residential applications, but is not limited to residential applications.


3 of 3 6/1/2016 10:49 AM

Page 57 of 67




5000_CCN_38.pdf






Related Item

Correlating Committee Note No. 38-NFPA 5000-2016 [New Section after 55.12]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



161 of 185 5/17/2016 1:23 PM

Page 58 of 67

Correlating Committee Note No. 38-NFPA 5000-2016 [ New Section after 55.12 ]




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



CommitteeStatement:

The Correlating Committee directs the TC on Fundamentals (FUN) and the occupancy committees (AXM, END, HEA, BCF, RES,DET, MER, IND) to review the proposed change and determine if further changes are needed in the Code. The CorrelatingCommittee will revisit the scope of the TC on Building Service and Fire Protection Equipment (BSF) after they propose any desiredchanges.


Ballot Results


18 Eligible Voters

2 Not Returned

15 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Newman, Michael T.

Wooldridge, Jerry

Affirmative All


Frable, David W.

Francis, Sam W.

Hansen, Raymond N.

Harrington, John C.

Hopper, Howard

Hugo, Jeffrey M.

Humble, Jonathan

Jones, Gerald H.

Leavitt, Russell B.

Quiter, James R.


Shah, Faimeen

Vinci, Leon F.

Willse, Peter J.



1 of 2 3/2/2016 2:25 PM

Page 59 of 67

Laramee, Scott T.

No comment, but no way to accept as "affirmative" without accepting all as "affirmative in the ballot portal.


2 of 2 3/2/2016 2:25 PM

Page 60 of 67

First Revision No. 1505-NFPA 5000-2015 [ New Section after 55.12 ]



Where required by another section of this Code , a risk analysis for mass notification systems shall be provided in accordance withthe requirements of NFPA 72 and the provisions of 55.13.2 through 55.13.4 .







An emergency communications system in accordance with NFPA 72 shall be provided where the need for such a system is identifiedby the risk analysis required by 55.13.1 , commensurate with the likelihood, vulnerability, magnitude, and potential consequences ofemergencies.


The completed emergency action plan shall be used for the design guideline for the mass notification/emergency communicationssystem.


Submitter Full Name: BLD-BSF


Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Mon Aug 03 12:08:23 EDT 2015


CommitteeStatement:

The purpose of this revision is to provide a requirement to conduct a risk analysis and create an emergency action plan for thefacility. The need for effective emergency communications in the United States came into sharp focus in the 20th century inresponse to threats to homeland security and our educational occupancies. We have learned from the recent incidents that occurredin our college/university campuses and other buildings, and have created installation guidelines to be followed for life safety. [Aurora,CO. Theater 2012; Columbine 1999; Virginia Tech 2007; Sandy Hook 2012; Weather Tornadoes/Storms]. //

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) School Safety, Codes and Security Workshop, was held December 3–4, 2014, inCollege Park, Maryland, and was sponsored and hosted by NFPA. This report highlights the need for real time communicationsystems in appropriate occupancies. //

NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code, has a chapter dedicated to Emergency Communication Systems. This containsthe detailed information on the risk analysis and emergency action plan as required in the above proposed sections. //

This is NOT intended to require a mass notification system. There are many elements contained within a mass notification syste, theprocess of the risk analysis will outline what is needed based on risk and engineering study for the occupancy. It will be theresponsibility of the occupancy to react to the risk assessment. //

A task group has been appointed to further review the location of the material in Ch. 55. The committee requests the CorrelatingCommittee review this action in conjunction with related actions by the TC on Fundamentals and the occupancy committees toensure the provisions are appropriately coordinated. The committee also requests the CC review the scope of BLD-BSF torecommend any needed changes to accommodate the addition of the proposed language. //

The task group will also address the reference to an emergency action plan, which is not currently required by NFPA 5000.

ResponseMessage:

Public Input No. 73-NFPA 5000-2015 [New Section after 55.2]

Ballot Results


1 of 2 5/26/2016 3:17 PM

Page 61 of 67


28 Eligible Voters

5 Not Returned

23 Affirmative All



0 Abstention

Not Returned

Chen, Flora F.

Donga, Paul M.

Grill, Raymond A.

Noveh, James

Szmanda, Michael R.

Affirmative All

Bradley, Harry L.

Brock, Pat D.

Dale, Stephen E.

Hagood, Claudia


Hugo, Jeffrey M.

Hutton, Claude O.

Jardin, Joseph M.

Kellett, Michael

Killian, David A.

Klepitch, David L.

Larrimer, Peter A.

Lazarz, Daniel J.

Moore, Wayne D.

Nuschler, Gary L.

Panowitz, Scott E.

Reiswig, Rodger


Ruchala, Kurt A.

Shudak, Lawrence J.

Warner, Todd W.

Wren, Carl D.

Wyatt, David M.

Editorial Comment

Click here


2 of 2 5/26/2016 3:17 PM

Page 62 of 67




Where required by another section of this Code , a risk analysis for mass notification systems shall be provided in accordance withthe requirements of NFPA 72 and the provisions of 55.13.2 through 55.13.4 .







An emergency communications system in accordance with NFPA 72 shall be provided where the need for such a system isidentified by the risk analysis required by 55.13.1 , commensurate with the likelihood, vulnerability, magnitude, and potentialconsequences of emergencies.


The completed emergency action plan shall be used for the design guideline for the mass notification/emergency communicationssystem.

See attached file for proposed changes.



Chapter_55_Risk_Assessment_Public_Comment_NFPA_5000_Submittal_Ver2.docxPublic Comment to FR 1505 from Dan Gauvin


The Risk Assessment in Section 55.13 should be applicable to Emergency Communication/Mass Notification Systems (both systems are addressed in NFPA 72 Chapter 24). Depending on the results of the risk analysis, either an emergency communication system or a mass notification system may sufficiently serve the need of the emergency action plan (and in some cases neither may be required).

A new section 55.13.1.2 has been added to clarify that the emergency communication/mass notification system is only needed where required by the results of the risk analysis (i.e. there are no prescriptive requirements for an emergency notification/mass notification system). The new 55.13.1.2 also replaces 55.13.3 in the first revision.

A new section 55.13.2 for Performance Design has been added. This section identifies the purpose of the risk analysis, the emergency communication/mass notification system, and the emergency communications/mass notification system emergency action plan that are necessary for identifying system design and performance requirements.

Section 55.13.2 (Considerations) in the first revision has been deleted. The public input language only identified a partial list of the considerations listed in NFPA 72 Chapter 24, and as such, this could be considered a conflict, or at the very least, create confusion between the two documents. The requirements in Section 55.13 for compliance with NFPA 72 Chapter 24 will automatically ensure all considerations will be consistently referenced.

A new section 55.13.3 has been added to identify the documentation requirements, who is responsible for the documents, and the requirement for the required documentation to be submitted to the AHJ. Without these requirements this section would be difficult to enforce.

Where applicable, references to NFPA 72 have been changed to NFPA 72, Chapter 24 (this is the NFPA 72 chapter reference for Emergency Communications Systems which also includes Mass Notification Systems).

Related Item



Submitter Full Name: Daniel Gauvin

Organization: Tyco Fire Suppression and Building Products

Street Address:

City:


162 of 185 5/17/2016 1:23 PM

Page 63 of 67

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Apr 20 18:48:54 EDT 2016


163 of 185 5/17/2016 1:23 PM

Page 64 of 67

Proposed Public Comment to NFPA 101 First Revision 1505-NFPA 5000-2015

55.13 Risk Analysis for Mass NotificationEmergency Communication/Mass Notification Systems.


55.13.1.1 Where required by another section of this Code, a risk analysis for emergency communication/mass notification systems shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 72, Chapter 24 and the provisions of 55.13.2 through 55.13.455.13.3.

55.13.1.2 Where required by the risk analysis in 55.13.1.1, the emergency communication/mass notification system shall be in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 72, Chapter 24.






55.13.2 Performance Design.

55.13.2.1 The purpose of the risk analysis for the emergency communication/mass notification system shall be to limit or control the consequences, extent, or severity of incidents and scenarios of concern identified through a risk analysis.

55.13.2.2 The purpose of the emergency communication/mass notification system shall be to communicate information about emergencies including, but not limited to, fire, human-caused events (accidental and intentional), other dangerous situations, accidents, and natural disasters.

55.13.2.3 The purpose of the emergency action plan for the emergency communication/mass notification system shall be to identify the emergency communication/mass notification system design and performance requirements in accordance with the results of the risk analysis.

55.13.3 Documentation

55.13.3.1 The emergency action plan, risk assessment report, and accompanying documentation shall be submitted to the authority having jurisdiction by the registered design professional (RDP). The format and content of the documentation shall be acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction.

55.13.3.2* Where required by the authority having jurisdiction, an independent review of the emergency action plan, risk assessment, and the accompanying documentation by one or more individuals possessing expertise in risk characterization for accidental and intentional hazards shall be performed.

A.55.13.3.2 These peer reviews should focus on the assumptions and methods of analysis used and on the findings. Peer reviewers should submit written assessment reports to the AHJ.


An emergency communications system in accordance with NFPA 72 shall be provided where need for such is identified by the risk analysis required by 55.13.1, commensurate with the likelihood, vulnerability, magnitude, and potential consequences of emergencies.


The completed emergency action plan shall be used for the design guidline for the mass notification/emergency communications system.

Page 65 of 67

Committee Input No. 1008-NFPA 101-2015 [ Global Input ]

The TC on Building Services and Fire Protection Equipment intends to draft revisions at thepublic comment stage to editorially revise Section 9.6 for user-friendliness. No technicalrevisions are intended as part of this activity.


Submitter Full Name: Greg Harrington


Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:


Committee Statement

Committee Statement: A task group has been appointed to draft editorial revisions as noted in the CI.

Response Message:


1 of 1 10/21/2015 12:20 PM

Page 66 of 67

Committee Input No. 1506-NFPA 5000-2015 [ Global Input ]

The TC on Building Services and Fire Protection Equipment intends to draft revisionsat the public comment stage to editorially revise Section 55.2 for user-friendliness. Notechnical revisions are intended as part of this activity.


Submitter Full Name: Greg Harrington


Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



Committee Statement: A task group has been appointed to draft editorial revisions as noted in the CI.

Response Message:


1 of 1 10/26/2015 12:27 PM

Page 67 of 67

Date post:	27-Sep-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times