Significant changes in NFPA 72-2019
Three years ago, in 2016, the latest
version of NFPA 72 was released, marking some influential changes to the fire
industry’s most influential regulatory document.
Now, in 2019, this year’s version has
more changes, marking an emphasis on clarifying emergency communication
guidelines for and improving mass notifications for fire protection engineers.
Whether you’re an architect, engineer, system
integrator, erecting contractor, building owner/ manager, NFPA 72 matters. It
will have an impact on how you design, test, install, and maintain life safety
systems in the future.
This article has highlighted some
of the more significant changes contained in NFPA 72-2019 that impact the
design professionals designing fire alarm systems. There are other changes
addressing topics, such as supervising
stations and inspection, testing,
and maintenance that are not included in the article because they
are issues generally outside the scope of services of the design professional.
1. Withdrawal
of NFPA 720
The first major change to note in the
2019 edition is the withdrawal of NFPA 720, the Standard for the
Installation of Carbon Monoxide (CO) Detection and Warning Equipment. The
standard did not go away, though, since it was simply relocated under the NFPA
72 provisions.
This means that, when a local building
code mandates carbon monoxide detection in a facility, your best bet is to turn
to NFPA 72 for direction on how best to comply. NFPA 72 will give you explicit
direction on the number and location of carbon monoxide detectors to satisfy
the code requirements and design an optimal system. My recommendation is that
you begin familiarizing yourself with these specifications so you can start to
work them into your designs
2. Maximum
and minimum mounting heights for FACU
It may seem odd that these
specifications have never been part of NFPA 72, but now they are. Control units
now will need to be installed between 1.5 feet and 5.5 feet above the finished
floor. This may affect how you design and engineer systems. Rather than
waiting, I’d suggest you begin making these specs part of your designs – even
if your jurisdiction is an edition or two behind the 2019 version.
3. Terminology
Clarifications
The next change to note, is adjustments
made to the terminology used in the document. These changes make understanding
the document much easier, and more closely reflect terminology used outside of
the regulatory space.
|
Old Terms
|
New Terms
|
|
Speaker
|
Loudspeaker
|
|
Visible
|
Visual (When referring to alarm notification appliances)
|
|
Communication
|
Communications
|
|
|
Activate (for electrical activations)
|
|
|
Actuate (for mechanical actuations)
|
4. Pre-Recorded
Communication
Another change in the latest version of
NFPA 72 requires that prerecorded messages installed in devices must, at a
minimum, include the official spoken language for the geographical area. The
change does not limit the use of multiple languages in the device.
5. Elevator
recall and evacuation operations are getting specific.
As buildings become smarter, they create
new opportunities to use elevators for evacuation in emergencies. The NFPA 72
term for them is Occupant Evacuation Elevators (OEE). The standard now provides
full codification of requirements and procedures on everything from how to shut
down elevators and signage requirements, to hardening and smoke detector
requirements for OEEs.
The availability of OEEs represents a
major step forward in your ability to support safe evacuations. As you design
and engineer new buildings, start thinking about how best to implement OEEs to
help save more lives.
Many of the changes are reflected in a
new figure (Figure A.21.6) that has been added to illustrate the
elevator system interface with the building fire alarm system for occupant-evacuation-operation
(OEO) elevators. Current building code requirements in many jurisdictions
are resulting in more fire-service access elevators and OEO elevators being
required and provided in buildings, especially very tall buildings.
It should also be noted that when fire
alarm devices are installed in an elevator shaft, access for inspection and
testing shall be provided from outside of the shaft (Section 21.3.7).
6. Devices,
Systems Listed Under NFPA 72
The NFPA 72-2019 doesn’t spare any extra
details, and even makes sure to explain that smoke alarms aren’t the only tools
examined in the standard. It covers a handful of related devices. The document
mentions the application, installation, location, performance, inspection,
testing, and maintenance of:
·
Fire alarm systems
·
Supervising station alarm
systems
·
Public emergency alarm
reporting systems
·
Fire and carbon monoxide
detection and warning equipment
·
Emergency communication systems
(ECS)
NFPA 72-2019 also includes information
on mass notification systems for a series of applications. A mass notification
system could be used for:
·
Fire emergencies
·
Weather emergencies
·
Terrorist events
·
Biological, chemical, or
nuclear emergencies
7. Class
N pathways continue to make progress.
The 2016 edition of NFPA
72 created a new circuit designation called Class N pathways. These pathways
permit the use of non-life safety networks and Ethernet when interconnecting
life safety systems. Class N pathways opened up a whole new world of
opportunity and flexibility for professionals who design and build fire alarm
systems. Now, with the 2019 edition of NFPA 72, more guidance is being provided
on how life safety and other building systems can share pathways.
This represents an
important advance in smart building technology and the integration of building
and life safety systems. As IoT expands into life safety, the pace of change is
accelerating.
You will need to develop
expertise on how best to take advantage of the opportunities it presents, so
it’s smart to stay on top of these developments.
8. Visual alarm notification appliances
Light-pulse durations greater than 20
milliseconds, but not greater than 100 milliseconds, are now permitted where
the alerting capability of the visual notification appliance is demonstrated to
be equal to or greater than visual notification appliances with 20-millisecond
pulse duration (see 18.5.3.3 and Table A.18.5.3.3).
The change is based on testing performed
by the UL with guidance from the UL Standards Technical
Panel (STP) Task Group indicating that equivalent alerting can be
achieved with pulse duration greater than 20 milliseconds by increasing the
candela output to compensate for the longer pulse duration. It should be
noted that the increase in candela output is not something that design professionals
or contractors can do; this is addressed during the listing of the product.
Research also has shown that
ambient lighting plays an important part in visual notification appliance
performance. Therefore, Annex A material was added to provide support
for the selection of visual notification appliances for ambient
lighting conditions (see A.18.5.5.5.1).
9. Emergency communications systems
A new provision requires that the
proposed language for prerecorded automatic emergency voice messages be
identified on the permit plans. At a minimum, the language shall be
the official spoken language in that area, as determined by the authority
having jurisdiction (see 24.3.6.2). The language does not restrict the use
of messages using multiple languages, but at least the official language
shall be used.
With respect to control units for mass
notification systems, the option to have the equipment listed to UL 2017
has been deleted. The equipment is now required to be listed to UL 864 or
UL 2572. The scope of UL 2017 includes nonemergency
equipment and was useful at a time when UL 2572 did not
exist. It also should be noted that not all equipment listed to
UL 864 will meet all the performance requirements for mass notification system
control units. While equipment listed to UL 864 may be used for mass
notification systems, equipment listed solely to UL 2572 is not
permitted to be used as a fire alarm control unit.
Recent changes to the International
Building Code and to NFPA 101 require that a risk analysis be performed
for new fire alarm systems in certain buildings. The provisions that
address the required risk analysis remain in NFPA
72. However, when the risk-analysis requirement was only in
the mass notification system section of Chapter 24 of NFPA 72, a design
professional could decide not to include a mass notification system in a
project without doing the risk analysis because there would be no need to refer
to the Chapter 24 requirements.
Language was added to indicate that
previously approved risk analyses may be used as a baseline for new or
renovated facilities (see 24.3.12.1.1). For example, if a new dormitory
building is constructed on a university campus and the building is similar to
other such dorms on campus, a previously prepared risk analysis may be adequate
or at least serve as a baseline for the new building. However,
if a new 26,000-seat sports arena is being constructed on a university campus
where no such facility previously existed, any existing risk analysis will most
likely need to be revised to address the new sports arena.
10. Active shooter incidents
There are no changes in the 2019
edition of NFPA 72 related to active shooter incidents. However, as
NFPA 72 was completing this last cycle, several such
incidents occurred, which spurred some initiatives at the state
and local level to reduce or relax the requirements for fire alarm systems
in schools. Such an initiative is not within the scope of NFPA
72, but rather rests with the building code and fire code. The
recently completed International Code Council code-change cycle
addressed the IFC and the fire
safety provisions in IBC, with no modifications to the
requirements indicating when a fire alarm system is required in schools.
An argument can be made that NFPA 72,
including editions such as the 2013 and 2016 releases, already address the
issue. With respect to the priority of various signals, NFPA
72 states that mass notification system signals can take
precedence over fire alarm systems. While it is recognized that many of
the facilities involved in the recent incidents did not have mass notification
systems, a properly designed mass notification system could be an alternative
solution to eliminating any type of fire alarm system in schools.
With the risk-analysis requirement moved
to the building and fire codes, the potential need for mass notification
systems in such facilities will be addressed more completely. When the
risk analysis is prepared, the stakeholders will be better able to make a
risk-informed decision as to whether a mass notification system should be
provided. If provided, the mass notification system can provide better
emergency communications during active shooter incidents, and it should
not be necessary to eliminate a proven fire protection strategy of providing
fire alarm systems in schools.
Fire protection engineers also may want
to refer to NFPA 3000: Standard for an Active Shooter/Hostile Event
Response Program, currently the 2018 edition.
