Final Changes under NFPA 25, 2026

Final Changes under NFPA 25, 2026 

With the release of NFPA 25, 2026 Edition, significant changes have been introduced regarding the inspection, testing, and maintenance (ITM) of water-based fire protection systems. Keeping these changes in mind is necessary for affiliates who manage or advise on sprinkler system compliance and performance. Highlights of these updated requirements include: 

·        Testing solenoid monitoring devices every quarter. 

·        Conducting internal inspections of all dry, pre-action, and deluge valves once per year. 

·        Expanding annex material clarifying inspector qualifications and the scope of their role in verifying system design aspects.  

·        Replacing 50-year-old sprinklers in dwelling units with fast-response models or thermally testing representative samples. 

·        Reviewing expanded annex material clarifying inspector qualifications and the scope of their role in verifying system design aspects. 

·        Omitting the five-year hydrostatic test when the piping from the Fire Department Connection (FDC) to the fire department check valve is 10 feet or less and fully visible both internally and externally. 

These are extremely important safety updates intended to improve reliability, reduce failure rates, and clarify inspection responsibilities. All of which keep life and property safe. With this in mind, affiliates should review their ITM schedules, update inventory procedures, and ensure all staff are familiar with these new requirements. In the long run, this will avoid compliance pitfalls and maintain safe, functional systems.

Others represent substantive departures from what practitioners have been working with. Here’s what you need to know.

Chapter 1: Administration and Clarifying the Inspector’s Role

Evaluating whether a fire protection system is properly designed for the hazard it protects is outside the scope of an NFPA 25 service activity, and the 2026 edition makes that boundary clear. ITM service providers are not required to make that determination, and owners should not expect them to. That responsibility sits with the owner, who may need to engage a qualified design professional to fully evaluate the risk, particularly when occupancy, use, or storage conditions have changed. This boundary has been part of the standard for some time. The 2023 edition clarified that inspectors are not responsible for verifying the accuracy of the installation, and the 2026 edition builds on that by acknowledging that there are certain tasks within NFPA 25 that do require the inspector to verify elements of the design, such as water spray systems under Chapter 10, and the standard now accounts for those instances. The 2026 edition also clarifies that inspectors are not prohibited from communicating fire and life safety concerns to the owner when they observe something that raises a red flag, even if it falls outside their formal ITM scope. These communications should be made separately from the formal inspection report, and following up on any identified concern is the owner’s responsibility, not the ITM provider’s.

Chapter 4: General Requirements and Several High-Impact Updates

Qualified Personnel. The 2026 edition makes a notable shift in how personnel qualification requirements are handled. Previously, prescriptive qualification criteria lived in the mandatory body of the standard, making them enforceable requirements. In the 2026 edition, that language has been moved to an annex, where it now serves as recommended guidance and illustrative examples of what qualifications look like rather than a mandatory checklist. The reasoning behind this shift is sound. Prescriptive personnel qualification requirements are more appropriately established through local legislation than in a national ITM standard. Different jurisdictions have different licensing regimes, and a one-size-fits-all mandatory requirement in the standard can create conflicts with state and local law. The practical takeaway is that local jurisdiction requirements now carry more weight than ever on this issue. If your jurisdiction has a licensing or certification requirement for ITM personnel, that requirement governs, and you need to know what it is. The annex language remains a useful benchmark for evaluating qualifications where local requirements do not exist or are not specific enough to provide clear direction.

Frozen systems are now formally impaired. Any water-based fire protection system with ice in the piping between the water supply and discharge devices is now classified as impaired, not merely deficient. That classification triggers the full impairment response protocol, including notification obligations and fire watch evaluation. Partially thawed and returned to service is not acceptable.

Fire department notification is now explicit. The revised impairment notification requirements now explicitly require local fire department notification upon identification of an impairment, covering both preplanned and emergency scenarios. Previously, fire department notification was more implied. Practitioners should update their impairment procedures accordingly.

Impairment and deficiency correction now has recommended timeframes. The 2026 edition establishes annex guidance in Section A.4.1.6.2 that critical deficiencies should be corrected or repaired within 30 days, noncritical deficiencies within 90 days, and impairments as soon as practical. This is annex guidance rather than mandatory text, but it serves as a recognized enforcement benchmark. Expect AHJs to use these timeframes in enforcement conversations. For service providers, issue correction is no longer open-ended. Document findings, communicate timeframes to owners in writing, and track corrective actions through to closure.

Inactive systems must now be properly identified. Where all or part of a system is abandoned in place, sprinklers, hose valves, hoses, and alarm devices must be removed. Abandoned piping and valves must be uniquely identified to prevent confusion with active system components, which is a critical safety consideration for first responders and ITM personnel alike. NFPA

C Values in Dry and Preaction Systems. This change addresses a relatively technical but operationally important issue related to the maintenance of corrosion-mitigation systems used to justify elevated C values in dry-pipe and preaction systems. Under NFPA 13, certain corrosion mitigation technologies, including nitrogen generators, vapor corrosion inhibitors, and negative pressure systems, permit the use of a Hazen-Williams C value of 120 rather than the standard lower value of 100. That higher C value results in more favorable hydraulic calculations, allowing for smaller pipe sizes and less expensive systems, which is why many systems are designed around it. The C factor describes the relative roughness of the pipe interior and accounts for corrosion buildup over the system’s life. Corrosion byproduct buildup has been found to be worse in dry systems than in wet systems, which is why different C factors are prescribed. When corrosion mitigation technology is used to justify a higher value, that technology must be maintained throughout the system’s life, or the hydraulic advantage it provides disappears. The 2026 edition makes that obligation enforceable under NFPA 25. Corrosion mitigation systems must now be inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance with the standard and the manufacturer’s instructions. If the mitigation system fails to maintain the conditions that justify the elevated C value, the system must be hydraulically recalculated using a C value of 100 and modified as necessary. Systems designed around a C value of 120 may be hydraulically inadequate if the corrosion mitigation equipment is not properly maintained, and this change closes that gap.

Chapter 5: Sprinkler Systems and Major Changes with Long-Term Implications

·        Dwelling unit sprinklers installed 50 or more years ago must be addressed. This is among the most consequential changes in the 2026 edition. Sprinklers in dwelling units (a category that includes hotel rooms, dormitories, apartments, condominiums, and nursing home sleeping rooms) that have been in service for 50 years or more must either be replaced with fast-response sprinklers or have representative samples tested to verify that the Response Time Index does not exceed 65 m·s½. The reason is straightforward: modern furnishings produce significantly faster fires than those of 50 years ago. Standard-response sprinklers installed in the 1970s may act too slowly under current fire conditions. Owners and service providers managing residential high-rises, hotels, and similar facilities should begin identifying the vintage of installed sprinklers now.

·        Escutcheons and cover plates are now a compliance item. The 2026 edition requires that missing or damaged escutcheons and cover plates for recessed, flush, and concealed sprinklers be replaced with listed components from the original assembly. Escutcheons caulked or adhered to ceilings must also be replaced, as they can physically prevent proper sprinkler deployment. If a listed escutcheon is no longer commercially available, the entire sprinkler assembly must be replaced. The reason this matters goes beyond the escutcheon itself, metallic escutcheons are often the exception for allowing a sprinkler penetration through fire-rated construction without having to firestop the opening. A missing or damaged escutcheon may compromise the occupancy’s fire rating.

·        Spare wrench and sprinkler cabinet requirements. The 2026 edition codifies two requirements that work together to improve system accountability at the sprinkler cabinet level. First, one manufacturer-specified wrench must now be maintained on the premises with the spare sprinklers for each sprinkler type installed. Previously, this was expected practice. Now it is enforceable, and AHJs have clear authority to cite its absence as a deficiency. The correct wrench matters for reasons beyond compliance. It protects the sprinkler from damage during installation or repair, and if a sprinkler inadvertently activates, using an improper wrench to reset it can cause damage that compromises a forensic examination of the event. Second, a more detailed sprinkler list must now be posted inside the cabinet, and it must contain: the SIN if equipped, manufacturer, model, K-factor, deflector type, thermal sensitivity, pressure rating, temperature rating, wrench model number, quantity installed, quantity stored in the cabinet, and the issue or revision date of the list. Knowing exactly what sprinklers are installed in a building is essential for responding to product recalls. A recall notice is only actionable if the owner and service provider can quickly determine whether the affected product is present and in what quantity. If sprinklers are replaced or restocked with a different model, the list must reflect it. For ITM practitioners, cabinet list verification should be added to every inspection checklist, with confirmation that the contents meet the requirements and that the revision date reflects the current system configuration.

Chapter 13: Common Components and Valves

·        Hose valve inspections move from annual to quarterly. The 2026 edition resolves a longstanding conflict between Chapter 6 and Chapter 13 on hose valve inspection frequency. Chapter 6 required an annual inspection while Chapter 13 required quarterly, leaving practitioners without a clear answer. The 2026 edition removes the inspection criteria from Chapter 6 and establishes quarterly as the governing frequency going forward. That increase reflects the reality that damaged threads, missing caps, leaking valves, and obstructions can develop well within a year. Quarterly inspections reduce that exposure and improve system readiness. The edition also adds a new requirement that hose connection caps not rated for pressure must have an opening of at least 1/8 inch in diameter. This weep hole addresses a genuine safety concern. Hose valve caps are typically not listed to hold pressure, so if a hose valve is leaking and the cap has no opening, pressure can build behind the cap and create a hazardous condition with the potential for serious injury. The weep hole mitigates that risk by allowing pressure to bleed off rather than accumulate. It also serves a secondary function during inspection: a cap with a weep hole makes it immediately visible that the valve is not fully closed, preventing a false assumption that the system is secure when it is not.

·        Preaction and deluge valves require annual internal inspections. Historically, valves that could be reset without removing a faceplate were permitted to have internal inspections only every five years. The 2026 edition eliminates that allowance entirely. Valve design no longer determines the applicable frequency, and the five-year alternative is gone for all valve types. The rationale is straightforward: a five-year interval left a window where internal deterioration, including corrosion, debris, and component wear, could go undetected long enough to affect performance. For service providers, if your ITM programs or contracts relied on the five-year interval for resettable valves, update them now. For AHJs, the annual requirement applies universally with no exceptions remaining.

·        FDC Piping Hydrostatic Testing. The 2026 edition expands the exemption from the five-year hydrostatic test for short fire department connection piping runs, increasing the threshold from 4 feet to 10 feet. To qualify, the piping must be capable of being visually inspected both internally and externally. Internal inspection can be accomplished using a push-style video camera, which is readily available and cost-effective for runs of this length, and this allowance does not replace required external inspections. The change reflects a practical reality that anyone who has attempted hydrostatic testing on short FDC piping runs will recognize. The geometry of these runs does not lend itself to a reliable test, making hydrostatic testing difficult to perform accurately and of limited value at this scale. Visual inspection using accepted methods is consistent with other pipe inspection practices already recognized by the standard and represents a more operationally sound approach for piping within this range.

·        Quarterly testing for solenoid supervisory signal devices. The 2026 edition adds a quarterly testing requirement for solenoid supervisory signal devices that monitor the coil position on electric actuators controlling preaction and deluge valves. The problem this addresses is straightforward and serious. Solenoid coils are frequently removed from solenoids in the field, and without the coil, the solenoid will never open. For preaction and deluge systems that rely on electric actuation, the solenoid is a required element of the actuation sequence. No coil means the valve will not open when a fire is present, regardless of whether every other system component performs exactly as designed. Supervising the coil provides assurance that the system will function as intended when called upon. Quarterly testing closes that gap and should be added to preaction and deluge system inspection routines. For AHJs, this provides a clear compliance anchor where none previously existed.

Industry Impact

The changes would increase the frequency of inspections, tighten documentation requirements, and clarify definitions, all of which will have direct impacts on contractors, building owners and AHJs. The trend is unmistakable: More accountability, better system reliability, and more standardized enforcement.

For contractors, this means:

Increased inspection and testing scope

Expanded documentation requirements

More coordination on repair timelines with AHJs

These changes provide owners and AHJs with more defined expectations, as well as higher-quality tools to ensure that systems are adhered to and function properly.

Commercial Business Fire Safety (2026 Focus) 

Regulatory changes also affect commercial business occupancies, with revisions to NFPA 101 and ongoing Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) enforcement. As industry leaders, CF affiliates always adapt to egress, alarms, suppression, and documentation requirements. All the while, anticipating even stricter local enforcement and digital reporting trends. The following key developments are where affiliates should place their focus in the coming year: 

·        NFPA 101 Life Safety Code (2027 update): The code is undergoing revision, with the second draft available March 3, 2026, and public debates at the NFPA convention in Las Vegas (June 22–24, 2026). 

·        OSHA 29 CFR 1910: Employers must maintain sprinkler systems, fire extinguishers, and emergency plans, with enforcement intensifying for annual servicing and thorough documentation of system impairments. 

·        Local jurisdictions: There’s an increasing focus on annual inspections, strict maintenance of commercial cooking fire suppression systems, and emergency lighting, with harsher penalties for non-compliance and growing demands for digital reporting. 

The developments described above underscore the importance of strong fire protection strategies, thorough documentation, and ongoing training for affiliates. Staying on top of these necessary updates ensures compliance and demonstrates your commitment to business safety. 

Schools & Educational Facilities 

Educational facilities face unique fire safety challenges just like any other. The NFPA 101 2024 Edition provides clear standards for new and existing schools, with a focus on life safety, system integration, and preparedness. Affiliates working with educational clients should make sure that these requirements are understood and implemented: 

·        Monthly fire drills: These must take place during each school session. 

·        Sprinkler systems: These must be integrated to activate the building’s fire alarm system. 

·        Carbon monoxide detectors: These must be installed in rooms with fuel-burning appliances and in adjacent spaces. 

·        Automatic sprinkler systems: These are mandatory for most new educational occupancies over 1,000 square feet. 

·        Decorations and combustibles: There are strict limits on wall coverage—20% in non-sprinklered, 50% in sprinklered buildings. 

·        Evacuation Plans: Schools must maintain on-site approved fire safety and evacuation plans, including impairment coordinators and designated fire wardens. 

Keeping up with requirements helps schools maintain a safe learning environment and achieve compliance with minimal disruption. Combining this with regular communication, training, and documentation can set you up for success in terms of fire safety management. 

Final Thoughts

This primer showcases just some of the changes coming with NFPA 25, 2026 Edition. When jurisdictions adopt new editions of codes and standards, these changes will have a direct impact on compliance requirements and operational practices.

Staying informed is critical. Stakeholders being able to understand not just what has changed, but why, will enable better implementation of compliant ITM programs and avoidance of deficiencies that can ultimately help preserve reliable fire protection systems. Other information, including the rationale for changes, can be found via the NFPA code development process.

 

NFPA 25 2026 Updates

NFPA 25 2026 Upcoming Updates 

NFPA 25 is the standard that governs the inspection, testing, and maintenance (ITM) of water-based fire protection systems. First published in 1992, it is updated every three years to incorporate new research, industry developments, and evolving safety requirements. Unlike some other NFPA standards, NFPA 25 is specifically designed for building owners rather than Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJs) and contractors. For fire protection professionals, staying informed about these updates is critical to maintaining compliance, ensuring safety, and optimizing business practices. Here’s a summarized breakdown:

NFPA 25 2020 Edition:

• New Definitions:
• Automated Inspection and Testing and Lowest Permissible Suction Pressure.
• Inspection Requirements:
• Relocation of owner responsibilities (e.g., recalled components) to enforceable sections.
• Dry hydrant ITM requirements (not dry barrel).
• System Performance:
• Failure to provide system demand for fire pumps is now an impairment.
• Revised Chapters:
• Extensive updates to Chapters 12 and 13, including new timing requirements for waterflow alarms.

NFPA 25 2023 Edition:

• Testing Updates:
• Nitrogen system maintenance requirements.
• New testing intervals (e.g., fast-response sprinklers extended to 25 years).
• Clarifications and Additions:
• Labels for pressure-reducing valves.
• Inspection of head guards and painted sprinkler heads.
• System Adjustments:
• Chapter 14 changes for obstruction investigations (e.g., dry/preaction systems with a 25% delay threshold).
• Consolidation of waterflow alarm device testing into Chapter 13.

 NFPA 25 2026 Proposed Changes:

1.  Dwelling Unit Definition: A Point of Contention

One of the most discussed topics in the ongoing revisions of NFPA 25 is the definition of a “dwelling unit.” A clear and standardized definition would eliminate confusion and ensure uniformity in the application of fire protection requirements. The subject has sparked debate, and although early proposals were rejected due to insufficient data, this issue remains under active discussion as the public comment period continues.

This topic’s importance lies in its potential to clarify which fire protection systems are required in residential settings versus commercial ones. With input from various stakeholders, NFPA committees are working to strike the right balance between clarity and practicality.

2.  Proposed Updates on System Definitions and Rules

Several key changes are being proposed to further define and refine certain fire protection system components. One such update is the definition of a system riser. This component, commonly understood as the point where water enters a structure, has been more clearly defined in the current revision. This change originated in NFPA 13 and was incorporated into NFPA 25 in this edition. NFPA 13 now allows hydraulic calculations using a C factor of 120 for dry pipe and preaction systems when those systems incorporate certain corrosion inhibiting technologies. The system riser, which can be vertical or horizontal, connects the water supply to the mains or cross-mains and includes a control valve. For each floor, there needs to be a hydraulic and general information sign, ensuring proper system operation. The C factor describes the relative roughness of the pipe interior, which accounts for an average amount of corrosion in both wet and dry systems over the 20-year life of the system. The build-up of corrosion byproducts on the wall of a pipe has proven to be worse in dry systems than wet systems; therefore, different C factors are prescribed by NFPA 13. The higher C factor of 120 allows for smaller pipe sizes to be used when hydraulically calculating the system for the available water supply, and therefore a less expensive system. However, an approved corrosion inhibiting technology must be maintained during the entire life of the system, or the system may become ineffective during a fire event because of the restriction in water delivery through the piping system caused by corrosion.

Because of the allowance of the higher C factor in NFPA 13 and the need to continuously maintain an approved corrosion inhibiting technology, the new edition of NFPA 25 has several proposed requirements to address that need. Previous paragraph 4.1.4.3 has been expanded from only referencing nitrogen as a corrosion inhibitor to create a new subsubsection 4.1.5 that includes all corrosion mitigation system technologies that must be maintained for the life of the system. If a corrosion mitigation system is not maintained, the dry or preaction system must be recalculated using a C factor of 100 and modified as necessary.

A related change was made to address the inspection, testing, and maintenance of corrosion-inhibiting systems with the addition of a new Section 13.11.

3.  Frozen System Guidelines: Strengthening Safety Protocols

The issue of frozen systems has also prompted attention. PI No. 172 proposes guidelines for dealing with frozen systems, For example, inspect all of the pipe, fittings, and components to determine if there is further damage or deformities, test the system with air, then perform a hydrostatic test just to name a few items. The goal is to ensure that systems are safe and operational after thawing, which may require inspecting components for damage and abnormalities. This change is a step toward enhancing system reliability, especially in colder climates.

4.  Backflow Prevention Devices: Clarity Needed

Another area of focus is the definition and regulation of backflow prevention devices, particularly Double Check Valve Assemblies (DCVA) and Reduced Pressure Backflow Assemblies (RPBA). Public comments have suggested that these devices, which are inspected less frequently, should not be given as much emphasis in the standard’s annexes.

While NFPA 25 doesn’t directly address these devices, their mention in an annex has raised concerns, especially as these devices only undergo internal inspections every five years. As the standard evolves, it will be important to determine the best way to handle these devices, ensuring that they are properly maintained without unnecessary inspection burdens.

5.  Inspector’s responsibilities & qualifications

The purpose of NFPA 25, according to the standard itself, is to “provide requirements that ensure a reasonable degree of protection for life and property from fire through minimum inspection, testing, and maintenance methods for water-based fire protection systems.” To that end, the NFPA 25 inspector should understand the scope of the standard, be familiar with its requirements, and be qualified to perform the required inspection and testing tasks. 

The inspection, testing, and maintenance (ITM) requirements of NFPA 25 have always been based on the premise that the water-based fire protection system was installed correctly in accordance with “generally accepted practice” as stated in 1.1.3. However, because many building owners and enforcers had unreasonable expectations for the inspector to be able to verify the adequacy and accuracy of the installed system, a specific statement to the contrary was added to paragraph 1.1.3.1. The intent of this statement has always been to make it clear that inspectors are not expected, or trained, to do more than inspect and test the system as installed.

In the 2023 edition, paragraph 1.1.3.1 was changed slightly to clarify that along with the inspector not being responsible for verifying the accuracy of the design of the system, the inspector isn’t responsible for verifying the accuracy of the installation of the system, either. However, there are certain tasks within NFPA 25 that require the inspector to verify the accuracy of the design. For instance, in Chapter 10, the inspector is required to consult NFPA 15, Standard for Water Spray Fixed Systems for Fire Protection, and be knowledgeable about the design requirements to successfully inspect and test the water spray system. Because there are instances in NFPA 25 that require verification of the design, a proposed change to 1.1.3.1 would acknowledge those instances in the 2026 edition.

Another change proposed for the 2026 edition addresses the qualifications of the NFPA 25 inspector. The 2023 edition lists three qualifications for personnel performing ITM functions. However, it was determined by the technical committee that it was not appropriate for NFPA 25 to dictate these prescriptive requirements. Instead, it should be left to the local jurisdiction through the legislative process to determine what the requirements are for qualified personnel. The qualifications in subparagraph 4.1.1.3.1 were deleted—they now reside in the annex to 4.1.1.3 as guidance—and paragraph 4.1.1.3 was modified to require the use of personnel qualified to perform specific ITM tasks.

6.  Annual Internal Inspections

All dry, preaction, and deluge valves will require annual internal inspections for dry pipe, preaction, and deluge systems has also come under scrutiny. Currently, dry pipe valves must be opened annually, even if they’ve been reset. Public feedback has questioned this requirement, particularly for systems with external reset capabilities. The committee is considering updates that would eliminate the five-year internal inspection restrictions for certain systems, but still require annual valve openings for others.

7.  System Gauges: Establishing Clear Guidelines

NFPA 25 previously did not specify when a system gauge is considered new, often assuming that a gauge was new until it was put into operation. PI No. 23 clarifies that the production date or shelf life of a gauge does not determine its age — the clock starts ticking once the gauge is installed in the system. This clarification should help avoid confusion and ensure that gauges are properly tested and maintained throughout their life cycle.

8.  Repair Timelines: Setting Clear Expectations

Repair timelines for both critical and non-critical systems have also been revised. PI No. 16 suggests specific repair times for degraded systems to ensure timely action. While similar standards exist in the NFPA 1 Fire Codes (2021 and 2024), the committee is still refining language around repair timelines. The second draft meeting will address whether these updates are feasible and how they should be applied across different system types.

9.  Documentation Cabinet: Enhancing Record-Keeping

The 2025 edition of NFPA 13 will require the construction of a documentation cabinet on new installations to store vital documents, such as acceptance tests, as-builts, and hydraulic data plates. This proposal, PI No. 12, aims to streamline access to key information for inspections and maintenance. However, there is ongoing debate about whether NFPA 25 should mandate the inspection of these cabinets and whether this requirement should apply retroactively to existing systems.

Conclusion

These are just a few examples of the suggested changes for the 2026 edition of NFPA 25. It is important to note that even if changes were accepted or denied in the first draft, their status is not final. The NFPA process allows for any public input or first draft item to be reopened in the second draft. For example, the requirement to open preaction and deluge valves annually was resubmitted in the second draft, proposing a change to a 3-year interval.

Understanding these updates allows you to guarantee that your water-based fire protection systems are inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance with the most recent requirements. This not only protects your property, but also the lives of those who dwell in your building.

Source: NFPA & NFSA.