PROPOSAL # 72-382 LOG# 411 SIG-SSS

Submitter: Louis T. Fiore, L. T. Fiore, Inc.

Recommendation: Renumber sections 8.5.2, 8.5.3, 8.5.4, 8.5.5 and 8.5.6 as

8.5.3, 8.5.4, 8.5.5, 8.5.6 and 8.5.7 respectively.

Insert a new section 8.5.2 as follows:

8.5.2* Indication of Remote Station Service. The prime contractor shall

conspicuously indicate that the fire alarm system providing service at a

protected premises complies with all the requirements of this Code through the

use of a systematic follow-up program under the control of the organization

that has listed the prime contractor.

8.5.2.1 Documentation indicating code compliance of the fire alarm system

shall be issued by the organization that has listed the prime contractor.

8.5.2.2 The documentation shall include, at a minimum, the following

information:

(1) Name of the prime contractor involved with the ongoing code compliance

of the remote station service

(2)* Full description of the fire alarm system as installed

(3) Issue and expiration dates of the documentation

(4) Name, address, and contact information of the organization issuing the

document

(5) Identification of the authority(ies) having jurisdiction for the remote

station service installation

8.5.2.3 The documentation shall be physically posted within 1 m (3 ft) of the

fire alarm control unit, and copies of the documentation shall be made available

to the authority(ies) having jurisdiction upon request.

8.5.2.4 A remote repository of issued documentation, accessible to the authority

having jurisdiction, shall be maintained by the organization that has listed the

prime contractor.

8.5.2.5* Fire alarm system service that does not comply with all the

requirements of Section 8.3 shall not be designated as remote station service.

NOTE: See Committee comments correcting this 8.3 reference to read 8.5.

8.5.2.6* For the purpose of Section 8.5, the subscriber shall notify the prime

contractor, in writing, of the identity of the authority(ies) having jurisdiction.

8.5.2.7 The authority(ies) having jurisdiction identified in 8.5.2.2(5) shall be

notified of expiration or cancellation by the organization that has listed the

prime contractor.

8.5.2.8 The subscriber shall surrender expired or canceled documentation to the

prime contractor within 30 days of the termination date.

A.8.5.2 The terms certificated and placarded, which appeared in previous

editions of NFPA 72, were considered by some to be too specific to two listing

organizations and were replaced with more generic wording. The concept of

providing documentation to indicate ongoing compliance of an installed system

continues to be reflected by the current language.

A.8.5.2.2(2) The record of completion (see Chapter 4) may be used to fulfill

this requirement.

A.8.5.2.5 It is the prime contractor’s responsibility to remove all compliance

markings (certification markings or placards) when a service contract goes into

effect that conflicts in any way with the requirements of 8.5.2.

A.8.5.2.6 The prime contractor should be aware of statutes, public agency

regulations, or certifications regarding fire alarm systems that might be binding

on the subscriber. The prime contractor should identify for the subscriber which

agencies could be an authority having jurisdiction and, if possible, advise the

subscriber of any requirements or approvals being mandated by these agencies.

The subscriber has the responsibility for notifying the prime contractor of

those private organizations that are being designated as an authority having

jurisdiction. The subscriber also has the responsibility to notify the prime

contractor of changes in the authority having jurisdiction, such as where there

is a change in insurance companies. Although the responsibility is primarily the

subscriber’s, the prime contractor should also take responsibility for seeking

out these private authority(ies) having jurisdiction through the subscriber. The

prime contractor is responsible for maintaining current records on the

authority(ies) having jurisdiction for each protected premises.

The most prevalent public agency involved as an authority having jurisdiction

with regard to fire alarm systems is the local fire department or fire prevention

bureau. These are normally city or county agencies with statutory authority,

and their approval of fire alarm system installations might be required. At the

state level, the fire marshal’s office is most likely to serve as the public

regulatory agency.

The most prevalent private organizations involved as authorities having

jurisdiction are insurance companies. Others include insurance rating bureaus,

insurance brokers and agents, and private consultants. It is important to note

that these organizations have no statutory authority and become authorities

having jurisdiction only when designated by the subscriber.

With both public and private concerns to satisfy, it is not uncommon to find

multiple authorities having jurisdiction involved with a particular protected

premises. It is necessary to identify all authorities having jurisdiction in order

to obtain all the necessary approvals for a remote station fire alarm system

installation.

Substantiation: It has been shown that fire alarm systems that are properly and

timely maintained perform better, are more available and help to reduce false

alarms.

Experience has shown and data has been compiled that show a large number

of fire alarm and supervisory sensors as well as fire alarm systems have failed

without giving a trouble indication and would have, therefore, not properly

operated in the event of a fire. The only way to find such failed devices and

systems is to test and maintain these devices and systems. The only way to

assure a proper maintenance schedule is to mandate third party verification.

The recommended text clarifies that, by complying with the requirements of

this code, the testing, inspection, and maintenance requirements for the entire

remote station fire alarm system at the protected premise are required and

performed and also provides methods by which third party verification can be

performed.

Committee Meeting Action: Accept in Principle

Revise the following portion of the recommendation:

8.5.2.5* Fire alarm system service that does not comply with all the

requirements of Section 8.3 5 shall not be designated as remote station service.

Committee Statement: The committee action corrects an error in the

referenced section.

Number Eligible to Vote: 26

Ballot Results: Affirmative: 23 Negative: 1(Scot Colby, NBFAA Rep)

Ballot Not Returned: 2 Brown, T., Fox, H.

Explanation of Negative:

COLBY, S.: Lack of Technical Justification in the Substantiation. The

proposal has an opinion that experience has shown and data has been compiled,

but that information has not been provided.

There is no proof that an organization listing a prime contractor has any

bearing over the fact that a properly installed and maintained fire alarm system

will work more proficiently than one installed and maintained by a non-listed

prime contractor.

States have in place regulatory agencies such as State Fire Marshall and

Inspectors that use tagging systems to ensure proper installation and

maintenance on the alarm systems. The International Code Council 901.6 and

901.7 covers tagging requirements. These agencies force property owners to

have more inspections on systems than any listing organization that may

inspect one out of every hundred systems.

The proposal will place a cost of thousands of dollars a year on small Remote

Stations to be inspected and listed by the listing organization. The listing

organizations are known as Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories

(NRTL) such as UL and FM.

The proposal is taking a less stringent and costly system style Remote Station

and requiring it to be a Central Station System. The majority of Fire Alarms

installed are Remote Station Systems and have no reason to meet Central

Station Service requirements except for expanding the capital privately owned

NRTL. Remote Station and Central Station are unique in the code and should

remain that way.

There was an attempt made in two previous code cycles to make all systems

Central Station Systems and require prime contractors to be listed that failed to

be passed, this is the same issue the only difference is the type of system.

______