Significant changes in NFPA 72-2019

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.