Agenda Technical Committee on Protected Premises … · Technical Committee on Protected Premises Fire Alarm Systems ... o How is NFPA 72 organized? ... 281 PRO 21.4.1 revise

Agenda

Technical Committee on

Protected Premises Fire Alarm Systems

September 9-11, 2013

Saint Louis, MO

Item No. Subject

13-9-1 Call to Order (8:00 A.M)

13-9-2 Roll Call

13-9-3 Approval of Agenda

13-9-4 Approval Meeting Minutes – March 2013 [Enclosure]

13-9-5 Staff Remarks & Overview of New Process [Staff]

13-9-6 Strategy to Improve Correlation [Staff]

13-9-7 Assignment of TC Responsibility [Staff]

13-9-8 Task Group Reports

13-9-9 Review of Public Inputs/Generate First Revisions [Enclosures]

13-9-10 Other Business

13-9-11 Adjournment

National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169-7471 Phone: 617-770-3000 • Fax: 617-770-0700 • www.nfpa.org

MEETING MINUTES

NFPA TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON

PROTECTED PREMISES FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS (SIG-PRO)

Pre First Draft Meeting, March 18-19, 2013 Crowne Plaza, San Antonio, TX

Item No. Subject 13-3-1 Call to Order and Welcome (8:00 AM) Chair Merton Bunker called the meeting to order at 8:00 AM. 13-3-2 Approve Agenda Motion to approve the Agenda, seconded, and approved. 13-3-3 Approve Meeting Minutes from Richmond, VA, October 2011 Motion to approve the Minutes from 10-2011, seconded, and approved. 13-3-4 Guest Speaker Presentations Guests included:

Mr. Bob Schifiliti, TCC Chair delivered a presentation to help everyone better understand the changes made to the current edition of the Code. As part of his presentation, Mr. Schifiliti covered the following subjects.

o Review of 2013 Code as it stands now.

o How is NFPA 72 organized?

All circuits and pathways requirements are now under SIG-PRO chapter committee. Condition – Signal – Response Model. Unwanted alarms.

o New Chapter 7 – Documentation

Relocated documentation text from other chapters to Chapter 7 or put a pointer in Chapter 7 to the documentation in other chapters. Minimum required documentation.

o Summary of Changes – SIG PRO chapters o “Good Code” vs. “Bad Code”

13-3-5 Task Group Assignments Chairman Bunker assigned the following task groups to review Chapters 12, 21, and 23 to ensure that all issues are resolved by Public Input.

TG on Emergency Plan Terms (Dix [C], Weiss-Ishai, LeBlanc) TG on Wiring, Circuits and Pathways (Capowski [C], Horon, Hayes, VanKeuren,

Novak) TG on Zoning & Isolation (Belliveau [C], Willms, Crowley, Shah, Struck,

Shudak, Poole [NAS]) TG on Control Functions (Ruchala [C], Doliber, Lickefett, Carter, Weiss-Ishai,

Leszczak, Capowski, Burkhart) TG on Editorial Issues / MOS / Definitions (Hammerberg [C], Barrett, Harris) TG on ITM Correlation (Hayes [C], Crowley, Hopple, Willms) – ITM not

meeting this week TG on ECS Correlation (Ruchala [C], Bisker, Leszczak) TG on FUN Correlation (Novak [C], Kuhta, Humm) TG on Documentation (Horon [C], Olenick, Martorano)

13-3-6 Introduction of Members Those present introduced themselves (see attached Attendance Sheet for all attendees, Principles, Alternates, and Guests). 13-3-7 NFPA staff remarks & Overview of New Process Lee Richardson (NFPA Staff) provided the review of the new process and dates for the document cycle. Hotel conference room fire alarm system overview and exit requirements for meeting attendees.

Upcoming Dates Public Input Closing Date – 05-20-3013 First Draft TC Meeting – St. Louis, 09-09 through 09-11-2013 (SIG-PRO) First Draft Posted – 03-07-2014 Public Comment Closing Date – 05-16-2014 Second Draft TC Meeting – Indianapolis or Omaha, 07-14 through 07-18-2014

(SIG-PRO)

Second Draft Posted – 01-16-2015 NITMAM Closing Date – 03-06-2015 NITMAM / CAM Posting Date – 05-01-2015 NFPA Annual Meeting – Chicago, 06-22 through 06-25-2013 Issue of Documents with CAM – 08-20-2015

Committee members have requested / suggested Web-based training and Examples of the process moving forward. 13-3-8 Strategy to Improve Correlation Lee Richardson (NFPA Staff) provided the review of proposed strategies to improve correlation, as well as an overview of what correlation is. 13-3-9 Task Group Work Task groups continued work on assignments for presentation to the Committee members. 13-3-10 Guest Speaker Presentation (03-19-2013) Guests included:

Mr. Al Ramirez, Underwrites Laboratories, Inc.

o Mr. Ramirez reviewed Circuit Integrity Cable (UL) listing issues and answered questions regarding the listing of HFIT cables

13-3-11 Task Group Reports Task group reports. Task Group chairs or other representatives present provided overview of issues discussed and proposed actions.

TG on Editorial Issues / MOS / Definitions – Hammerberg TG on Emergency Plan Terms – Weiss-Ishai TG on Wiring, Circuits and Pathways – Capowski TG on Zoning & Isolation – Belliveau

13-3-12 Presentation by SIG ECS SIG PRO Committee members observed presentation by the SIG ECS Committee titled: “Ethernet and Networks for Fire Alarm and Emergency Communication Systems”.

13-3-13 Task Group Reports Continued Task group reports continued. Task Group chairs or other representatives present provided overview of issues discussed and proposed actions.

TG on Control Functions – Ruchala, Weiss-Ishai, Doliber, Lickefett TG on ECS Correlation – Ruchala TG on ITM Correlation – ITM not meeting this week TG on FUN Correlation – Humm TG on Documentation – Horon

13-3-14 Other Business No Other Business was documented at this time. No New Business was documented at this time. Train available from St. Louis airport to downtown St. Louis; train transportation is an economical option to taxi transportation. 13-3-15 Adjournment Chairman Bunker fielded a motion to adjourn, it was so moved, seconded, voted on and approved. The meeting was adjourned. The meeting spanned two (2) days, 03-18-2013 and 03-19-2013. Respectfully submitted, Leonard Belliveau, Jr. NFPA 72, SIG-PRO Secretary

Attendance list for SIG-PRO preFirst Draft Meeting, San Antonio, TX, March 18-19, 2013: Principal Members in Attendance: Merton W. Bunker, Jr. US Department of State Leonard Belliveau, Jr. Hughes Associates, Inc. Scott Barrett Commercial Wireless Systems International Anthony Capowski Tyco/SymplexGrinnell Keith Dix West Metro Fire Department Thomas Hammerberg Automatic Fire Alarm Association, Inc. Scott Harris AFA Protective Systems, Inc. Mark Hayes Aon Corporation Daniel Horon CADgraphics, Incorporated Vic Humm Vic Humm & Associates Jebediah Novak International Brotherhood of Electrical John Olenick Central Station Alarm Association Kurt Ruchala FIREPRO Incorporated Lawrence Shudak Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Donald Struck Siemens Fire Safety Sagiv Weiss-Ishai San Francisco Fire Department Carl Willms Fire Safety Consultants, Inc. Diane Doliber (voting alternate) Consultant Alternates in Attendance: Richard Carter (alt. to D. Struck) Siemens Industry, Inc. Andre Lickefett (alt. to S. Martorano) National Fire Sprinkler Association Jefferey VanKeuren (alt. to T. Hammerberg)

Automatic Fire Alarm Association, Inc.

Lee Richardson NFPA Staff Liaison GUEST: Al Ramirez UL LLC.

NFPA 72 SIG-PRO PIs (Bold PI numbers indicate PI sent to more than one TC) *Revise includes delete PI TC Proposed 2013

Section *Type of Change

Related PI

Notes

284 PRO 3.3.91 revise 177 PRO 3.3.102.2.1 revise 65, 81,

380

507 PRO 3.3.259.1 3.3.259.2 3.3.259.3 3.3.259.4 3.3.259.5 3.3.259.6 3.3.259.7

508 PRO 7.3.5.4 new 365 PRO 7.3.7.4 new 195 PRO 12.2.3 revise 266 PRO 12.2.4.2 revise Emulated 514 PRO 12.2.4.2 revise 533 PRO 12.3.1 revise 535 PRO 12.3.2 revise 196 PRO 12.3.3 revise 270 PRO 12.3.6 new 542 PRO 12.3.6 revise 197 PRO 12.3.7 revise Any effect on annex 271 PRO 12.3.7 revise 270 366 PRO 12.3.7 revise 641 PRO 12.3.7 revise 369 PRO 12.3.8 new 295 PRO 12.4 revise Emulated

Check emulation See submitted PI pdf

297 PRO 12.4 revise Emulated Check emulation See submitted PI pdf

592 PRO 12.4.3 revise 63 PRO 12.4.3(4) new 598 PRO 12.4.4 revise 198 PRO 12.6.1 revise 272 PRO 12.6.1 revise 270

199 PRO 12.6.2 revise 322 PRO 12.6.11 revise 200 PRO 12.6.14 revise 277 PRO 12.6.17 revise 571 PRO 12.6.18 new 201 PRO 12.7 revise 566 PRO 21.1 revise See enclosed figure 278 PRO 21.2.6 revise 270 65 PRO 21.3.1 revised 81 PRO 21.3.2 revised 180 PRO 21.3.3 new 81 193 PRO 21.3.3 revise 194 PRO 21.3.4 new 221 PRO 21.3.5 new 53 PRO 21.3.6 revised 245 PRO 21.3.6 revise 194,

248

247 PRO 21.3.7 revise 193, 221, 248

248 PRO 21.3.8 revise 193, 221, 245, 247

249 PRO 21.3.9 revise 193 250 PRO 21.3.10 revise 65,

193, 251, 259, 283

251 PRO 21.3.11 revise 250, 259, 283

179 PRO 21.3.12 revise 259 PRO 21.3.13 revise 250,

251

260 PRO 21.3.14 revise 273, 274

54 PRO 21.3.14.1 revised 263 PRO 21.3.14.1 revise 273 273 PRO 21.3.14.2 revise 260,

262, 263

274 PRO 21.3.14.3 revise 260 281 PRO 21.4.1 revise 568 PRO 21.4.1 new Confirm placement 282 PRO 21.4.2 revise 261 283 PRO 21.4.4 revise 81,

250, 251

387 PRO 21.4.5.6 new Question section number and placement

269 PRO 21.5.3 new Emulated 379 PRO 21.5.3 new 378 PRO 21.6.2 revise 373 PRO 21.7.2 revise 359 PRO 21.8.3 revise 367 PRO 21.9.2 revise 368 PRO 21.9.3 revise 624 PRO 23.2.2.1 revise 71 PRO 23.3.2 revised 72 Emulated 231 PRO 23.3.2 revise 228 380 PRO 23.3.3.2.1 revise 65, 81,

177, 178

506 PRO 23.4.4 new 279 PRO 23.6 revise 270 354 PRO 23.6.1 revise 584 PRO 23.6.1 revise 588 285 PRO 23.6.1.1 new 270 304 PRO 23.6.1.1

23.6.1.2 new

355 PRO 23.6.1.1 new 356 PRO 23.6.1.2 new 286 PRO 23.6.2 new 270,

287

357 PRO 23.6.2 new 588 PRO 23.6.2

A.23.6.2 new 584

287 PRO 23.6.3 new 270, 286

358 PRO 23.6.3 new 288 PRO 23.6.4 new 270 360 PRO 23.6.4 new 361 PRO 23.6.5 new 10 PRO 23.8 new 11 Held ROC 72-278

98 PRO 23.8.1.1 A.23.8.1.1

99 Emulated Modify and relocate 23.8.1.1 to 10.11 Modify and relocate A.23.8.1.1 to A.10.11 See submitted PI pdf

215 PRO 23.8.2.2 revise 605 PRO 23.8.5.6.3

A.23.8.5.6.3 Revise new

89 PRO 23.8.5.9.1 revised 381 PRO 23.8.6.2.1 revise 382 PRO 23.8.6.2.2 revise 572 PRO 23.16.2 revise 576,

578

576 PRO 23.16.3 revise 572 578 PRO 23.16.4 revise 572 211 PRO 23.16.4.5 revise Emulated 594 PRO 23.16.5 revise 178 PRO A.3.3.102.2.1 revise 81, 380 203 PRO A.12.3 revise 204 PRO A.12.3.1 revise 205 PRO A.12.3.2 revise 206 PRO A.12.3.3 revise 293 PRO A.12.3.3 revise 207 PRO A.12.3.4 revise 208 PRO A.12.3.5 revise 289 PRO A.12.3.5 revise 209 PRO A.12.3.6 revise 290 PRO A.12.3.6(1) new 270 See attached figures 291 PRO A.12.3.6(4) new 270 292 PRO A.12.3.6(5) new 270 See attached figure 298 PRO A.12.4.2 new Emulated

Check emulation See submitted PI pdf

296 PRO A.12.4.3 A.12.4.4

new Emulated See submitted PI pdf

202 PRO A.12.7 new 570 PRO A.21.2.4 revise See enclosed figure 261 PRO A.21.3.7 revise 282 518 PRO A.21.3.9 revise Emulated 262 PRO A.21.3.14 revise 273 268 PRO A.21.3.14 revise Emulated 275 PRO A.21.3.14 revise 280 PRO A.21.4.2 revise

374 PRO A.21.7.2 revise Error message in change field 375 PRO A.21.7.3 revise 28 PRO A.23.6 From TIA 13-4

This TIA deleted A.23.6 of the 2010 edition. Thus, it is no longer in the 2013 edition. The TC needs to affirm the TIA or take other action on the deleted material that is deemed appropriate.

210 PRO A.23.6.1 revise 362 PRO A.23.6.1 revise 363 PRO A.23.6.3 new 364 PRO A.23.6.5 new 11 PRO A.23.8.3 new 10 Held ROC 72-278

7/12/13 TerraView™

submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ViewerPage.jsp 1/1

Public Input No. 284-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. 3.3.91 ]

3.3.91 * Emergency Control Functions.

Building, fire, and emergency control elements or systems that are initiated by the firealarm or emergency communications system signaling system and either increasethe level of life safety for occupants or control the spread of the harmful effects of fire orother dangerous products. (SIG-PRO)

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input

The Technical Committee on Carbon Monoxide Detection (NFPA 720) is submitting this public input to make the definition of Emergency Control Functions more generic and to allow other documents, including NFPA 720, to extract this definition.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name:Art Black

Organization: Carmel Fire Protection

Submittal Date: Wed May 15 09:08:24 EDT 2013

Copyright Assignment

I, Art Black, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights

in copyright in this Public Input (including both the 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

the NFPA in w hich this Public Input in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby w arrant that I am the

author of this Public Input and that I have full pow er and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I aff irm that I am Art Black, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright

Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am

creating an electronic signature that w ill, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a

handw ritten signature



Public Input No. 177-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. 3.3.102.2.1 ]

3.3.102.2.1 * Dedicated Function Fire Alarm Control Unit.

A protected premises fire alarm control unit which is intended to provide operation of aspecifically of specifically identified emergency control function (s) . (SIG-PRO)


Problem:There is a conflict between this section and section 3.3.105.4.2. The dedicated function FA control unit is limited to one emergency control FUNCTION, while the dedicated function FA control system could perform emergency control FUNCTIONS.

Solution:The proposed change makes these two sections consistent with each other and allowes for a dedicated function FA control unit to serve more than one emergency control function, such as a sprinkler waterflow and supervisory control unit could also serve as the control unit for Elevator reacll detectors.

Related Public Inputs for This Document

Related Input Relationship

Public Input No. 65-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 21.3.1] discuss same issues

Public Input No. 81-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 21.3.2] discuss same issues

Public Input No. 380-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 23.3.3.2.1]


Submitter Full Name:Sagiv Weiss-Ishai

Organization: San Francisco Fire Department, Fire Protection Engineer, P.E.

Submittal Date: Sun Apr 28 17:29:14 EDT 2013


I, Sagiv Weiss-Ishai, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and

full rights in copyright in this Public Input (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and




By checking this box I aff irm that I am Sagiv Weiss-Ishai, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright






Public Input No. 507-NFPA 72-2013 [ New Section after 3.3.259 ]

3.3.259.1 SLC-CN. A circuit path network between interconnected control units.

3.3.259.2 SLC-RC. A circuit path between control units and remote controllers.Remote controllers shall include annunciators and graphical workstations wherealarm reset, silence, and other system functions can be initiated.

3.3.259.3 SLC-AD. A circuit path between a control unit SLC termination point andaddressable devices connected to the specific SLC controller.

3.3.259.4 SLC-RA. A circuit path between control equipment and annunciators,printers, or graphical computer displays that do not have control capability.

3.3.259.5 SLC-OP. A circuit path between the protected premises and the supervisorystation.

3.3.259.6 SLC-GW. A circuit path between the protected premises fire alarm andsignaling system and other building management systems.

3.3.259.7 SLC-HB A combination of more than one of the SLC designations.


This is the work of the SIG-PRO Committee Task Group assigned to review this section and provide updated language for consideration. Members of the Task Group include L. Belliveau, L. Shudak, D. Struck and C. Willms. See Public Input No. 506.

Due to the variety of possible types of signaling line circuits it is important to be able to differentiate various levels of function, design, and survivability for the individual circuits.

For example, for a given fire alarm system design, the functionality and reliability of the circuit path network between interconnected control units (i.e., SLC-CN) could be specified as a Class X while the circuit path between a control unit SLC termination point and addressable devices connected to the specific SLC controller (i.e., SLC-AD) could be specified as a Class A. With the same system, the circuit path between the protected premises and the supervisory station (i.e., SLC-OP) could be specified as a Class C and the circuit path between the protected premises fire alarm and signaling system and other building management systems (i.e., SLC-GW) could specified as a Class E depending on the applicable code requirements for the installation and the designer’s fire protection goals for the system.

Designers, AHJs, technicians, and electricians need a defined way to differentiate between the circuits and their performance it is in a clear concise and consistent manor. The assignment of SLC designations within the code would meet this objective.


Submitter Full Name:Leonard Belliveau

Organization: Hughes Associates, Inc.

Affilliation: SIG-PRO Committee Secretary and Committee Task Group Chair

Submittal Date: Mon May 20 10:16:00 EDT 2013




Public Input No. 508-NFPA 72-2013 [ New Section after 7.3.5.3 ]

7.3.5.4 Carbon Monoxide Detectors and Carbon Monoxide Detection Systems

Carbon monoxide alarm signal fire alarm system processing and occupant responsedocumentation, such as the building's response plan, evacuation plan, fire safety plan, orsimilar documentation, shall be provided in accordance with 23.8.4.8 Exception and 23.8.4.8.2.


Reference to documentation for the processing of carbon monoxide alarm signals is made in section 23.8.4.8.1 and the Exception to 23.8.4.8. This is important becasue the code permits carbon monoxide alarm signals to be supervisory signals. In addition, the code requires processing and occupant response to be in accordance with these documents. This new section adds the requirement to have this documentation submitted and a record of it in Chapter 7, similar to other required documentation.




Affilliation: SIG-PRO Committee Secretary



I, Leonard Belliveau, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Leonard Belliveau, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright




jdepew

Inserted Text




7.3.7.4

Performance-based design documentation for signaling line circuit zoning shall be inaccordance with Section 23.6.2 and 23.6.3. (SIG-PRO).


This is the work of the SIG-PRO Committee Task Group assigned to review this section and provide updated language for consideration. Members of the Task Group include L. Belliveau, L. Shudak, D. Struck and C. Willms. Related to Public Input 357.





Submittal Date: Fri May 17 16:24:35 EDT 2013














12.2.3

The designation of the pathways shall be permitted to also include the performance ofthe pathway (interconnection) to survivability from attack by fire.


This public input has been created by the SIG-PRO Task Group on Wiring Systems. Members are: A.J. Capowski (Chair), Dan Horon, Sagiv Weiss-Ishai, Jebediah Novak, Mark Hayes, Vic Humm and Jeff Van Keuren.

The purpose of this public input is to eliminate the redundancy between sections 12.2.3 and 12.7.


Submitter Full Name:Anthony Capowski

Organization: Tyco/SimplexGrinnell



I, Anthony Capow ski, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Anthony Capow ski, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright






Public Input No. 266-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. 12.2.4.2 ]

12.2.4.2

All non-power-limited and power-limited signaling system circuits entering a buildingshall be provided with transient protection that extend beyond one building and runoutdoors either shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of this Code andNFPA 70, the National Electrical Code, Article 760 . (SIG-FUN)

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

72_Van_Keuren_2_Rev_1.pdf Cover Sheet ✓


This clarifies the requirement and makes it consistent with NFPA 70.760.32 Fire Alarm Circuits Extending Beyond One Building. Power-limited fire alarm circuits that extend beyond one building and run outdoors either shall meet the installation requirements of Parts II, III, and IV of Article 800 or shall meet the installation requirements of Part I of Article 300. Non-power-limited fire alarm circuits that extend beyond one building and run outdoors shall meet the installation requirements of Part I of Article 300 and the applicable sections of Part I of Article 225.


Submitter Full Name:Jeffery Van Keuren

Organization: UTC Climate Controls & Security



I, Jeffery Van Keuren, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Jeffery Van Keuren, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







12.2.4.2

All non-power-limited and power-limited signaling system circuits entering a buildingshall be provided with transient protection. (SIG-FUN)


Delete 12.2.4.2 in its entirety.

This new requirement added in 2013 is incomplete, unclear and potentially dangerous. The NEC recognizes that not all outside circuits require special transient suppression. There are two reasons for this. The first is that not all circuits that enter or exit a building are prone to lightning or other surge events. Therefore, the NEC qualifies which circuits require transient protection. The second reason that not all circuits that enter or exit a building are required to have transient protection is that adding surge suppression can actually attract lightning if not properly installed and may actually defeat protection that is built into the control units. Listing requirements for control panels already require some measure of transient protection for all circuits. Where additional transient protection is installed on both ends of a circuit which extends between two buildings, unless the grounding is to the same point or at the same potential there will be ground loops that will attract surges and damage systems. Additional transient protection beyond that required by the product listing should only be required in areas that are prone to lightning - as already required by the NEC. In addition, the requirement does not specify whether the transient protection should be of the parallel type or the serial type, which affects whether the circuit will continue to operate upon catastrophic failure of the protection device. For example, in most cases a parallel type should be used for initiating device circuits and signaling line circuits. This will permit those circuits to continue to operate if the device has been destroyed by the first strike. This can be important if that same lightning strike actually started a fire which could be detected if the detection or signaling circuit continued to operate. If a serial type had been used, the circuit might no longer be operational and would fail to detect the fire even though the panel would be protected against a second potential strike. There is a lot more thought, planning and design needed to properly specify transient protection. This 2013 requirement goes beyond the minimum requirements of a code or standard such as NFPA 72. NFPA 72 already requires compliance with the appropriate sections of the NEC.


Submitter Full Name:Robert Schifiliti

Organization: R. P. Schifiliti Associates, I



I, Robert Schif iliti, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full

rights in copyright in this Public Input (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and




By checking this box I aff irm that I am Robert Schif iliti, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright






12.3.1* Class A.

A pathway shall be designated as Class A when it performs as follows:

(1) It includes a redundant path.

(2) Operational capability continues past a single open, and the single open faultshall result in the annunciation of a trouble signal.

(3) Conditions that affect the intended operation of the path are annunciated as atrouble signal.

(4) Operational capability is maintained during the application of a single ground fault.

(5) A single ground condition shall result in the annunciation of a trouble signal.

Exception : Requirements in 12.3.1 (4) and (5) shall not apply to nonconductivepathways (e.g., wireless or fiber) and requirement 12 .3.1 (5) shall not apply togalvanically isolated conductors connected to Listed equipment that iscompliant with IEEE 802 standards.


Equipment that is compliant with IEEE 802 standards is galvanically isolated at each connection to prevent propagation of grounds and shorts into equipment or onto other cables. There is no operational impairment from a single ground on these isolated circuits. The consequence of two grounds is also mitigated by the isolation, as a short is isolated to an individual cable segment, and if that happens, a trouble is annunciated when an IEEE 802 compliant path loses communication. IEEE 802 requirements are not tested by IEEE, and should be Listed to ensure they provide the required isolation.


Submitter Full Name:Daniel Horon

Organization: Cadgraphics, Incorporated



I, Daniel Horon, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Daniel Horon, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







12.3.2* Class B.

A pathway shall be designated as Class B when it performs as follows:

(1) It does is not required to include a redundant path.

(2) Operational capability stops is allowed to stop at a single open.
























12.3.3 * Class C.

A pathway shall be designated as Class C when it performs as follows:

(1) It includes one or more pathways where operational capability is verified via end-to-end communication, but the integrity of individual paths is not monitored.

(2) A loss of end-to-end communication is annunciated as a trouble signal .



The purpose of this public input is to clarify section 12.3.3 and make it consistent with the other paragraphs in this section.


















12.2.4.2

All non-power-limited and power-limited signaling system circuits entering a buildingshall be provided with transient protection that extend beyond one building and runoutdoors either shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of this Code andNFPA 70, the National Electrical Code, Article 760 . (SIG-FUN)



72_Van_Keuren_2_Rev_1.pdf Cover Sheet ✓


This clarifies the requirement and makes it consistent with NFPA 70.760.32 Fire Alarm Circuits Extending Beyond One Building. Power-limited fire alarm circuits that extend beyond one building and run outdoors either shall meet the installation requirements of Parts II, III, and IV of Article 800 or shall meet the installation requirements of Part I of Article 300. Non-power-limited fire alarm circuits that extend beyond one building and run outdoors shall meet the installation requirements of Part I of Article 300 and the applicable sections of Part I of Article 225.


Submitter Full Name:Jeffery Van Keuren

Organization: UTC Climate Controls & Security



I, Jeffery Van Keuren, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Jeffery Van Keuren, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







12.2.4.2

All non-power-limited and power-limited signaling system circuits entering a buildingshall be provided with transient protection. (SIG-FUN)


Delete 12.2.4.2 in its entirety.

This new requirement added in 2013 is incomplete, unclear and potentially dangerous. The NEC recognizes that not all outside circuits require special transient suppression. There are two reasons for this. The first is that not all circuits that enter or exit a building are prone to lightning or other surge events. Therefore, the NEC qualifies which circuits require transient protection. The second reason that not all circuits that enter or exit a building are required to have transient protection is that adding surge suppression can actually attract lightning if not properly installed and may actually defeat protection that is built into the control units. Listing requirements for control panels already require some measure of transient protection for all circuits. Where additional transient protection is installed on both ends of a circuit which extends between two buildings, unless the grounding is to the same point or at the same potential there will be ground loops that will attract surges and damage systems. Additional transient protection beyond that required by the product listing should only be required in areas that are prone to lightning - as already required by the NEC. In addition, the requirement does not specify whether the transient protection should be of the parallel type or the serial type, which affects whether the circuit will continue to operate upon catastrophic failure of the protection device. For example, in most cases a parallel type should be used for initiating device circuits and signaling line circuits. This will permit those circuits to continue to operate if the device has been destroyed by the first strike. This can be important if that same lightning strike actually started a fire which could be detected if the detection or signaling circuit continued to operate. If a serial type had been used, the circuit might no longer be operational and would fail to detect the fire even though the panel would be protected against a second potential strike. There is a lot more thought, planning and design needed to properly specify transient protection. This 2013 requirement goes beyond the minimum requirements of a code or standard such as NFPA 72. NFPA 72 already requires compliance with the appropriate sections of the NEC.

















12.3.1* Class A.

A pathway shall be designated as Class A when it performs as follows:


























12.3.2* Class B.

A pathway shall be designated as Class B when it performs as follows:

(1) It does is not required to include a redundant path.

(2) Operational capability stops is allowed to stop at a single open.
























12.3.3 * Class C.

A pathway shall be designated as Class C when it performs as follows:

(1) It includes one or more pathways where operational capability is verified via end-to-end communication, but the integrity of individual paths is not monitored.

(2) A loss of end-to-end communication is annunciated as a trouble signal .



The purpose of this public input is to clarify section 12.3.3 and make it consistent with the other paragraphs in this section.


















Class N

12.3.6 Class N. A pathway shall be designated as Class N when it performs as follows:

(1)* It includes two or more pathways where operational capability of the primarypathway and a redundant pathway to each device shall be verified through end-to-end communication.

Exception: When only one device is served, only one pathway shall be required.

(2) A loss of intended communications between endpoints shall be annunciatedas a trouble signal.

(3) A single open, ground, short or a combination of faults on one pathway shallnot impact any other pathway.

(4)* Conditions that affect the operation of the primary pathway(s) and redundantpathway(s) shall be annunciated as a trouble signal when the system’s minimaloperational requirements cannot be met.

(5)* Primary and redundant pathways shall not be permitted to share traffic overthe same physical segment.


Questions concerning the acceptability of using Ethernet and other non-fire or non-MNS networks for fire alarm and signaling systems applications are being raised more and more. Because of these questions and the rapidly changing technology, the Task Group on Networks in FA/ECS was formed by the Correlating Committee to address the risk analysis, design, application, installation, and performance of networks and networking equipment used in fire alarm systems, fire EVACS and mass notification systems. This proposal and Annex material is a result of that effort.Some of the concerns that were raised during related discussions for the 2013 edition included: ground detection, system management, availability, and software control. These issues were discussed and the results are provided in the Task Group’s proposal.The task group reviewed the new Shared Pathway Designations added to Chapter 12 in 2013. The proposal addresses the type of network acceptable, reliability required, listings required and use of the network to connect devices or appliances or interfaced systems. The proposal is the recommendation by a unanimous vote of the Correlating Committee Task Group members that was comprised of TC members from Chapters 10, 14, 23, 24 and 26 as well as individuals outside of the committees.Wayne MooreA.J. CapowskiJoe L. CollinsDan HoronVic HummMichael PallettCharles PughRobert SchifilitiAviv Siegel



Larry ShudakBob ElliottPaul CrowleyJeff SilveiraJeff KnightAndrew Berezowski



Public Input No. 271-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 12.3.7]Class N NetworkSubmission




Public Input No. 279-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 23.6 [Excludingany Sub-Sections]]

Class N NetworkSubmission

Public Input No. 285-NFPA 72-2013 [New Section after 23.6.1]Class N NetworkSubmission




Public Input No. 290-NFPA 72-2013 [New Section after A.12.3.5]Class N NetworkSubmission




Submitter Full Name:Michael Pallett

Organization: Telecor Inc.



I, Michael Pallett, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Michael Pallett, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright






12.3.6* Class X.

A pathway shall be designated as Class X when it performs as follows:



(3) Operational capability continues past a single short-circuit, and the single short-circuit fault shall result in the annunciation of a trouble signal.

(4) Operational capability continues past a combination open fault and ground fault.




Exception : Requirements in 12.3.6 (3), (4), (6), and (7) shall not apply tononconductive pathways (e.g., wireless or fiber) and requirement 12 . 3.6 (7)shall not apply to galvanically isolated conductors connected to Listedequipment that is compliant with IEEE 802 standards.

.


















12.3.7 *

Class A and Class X circuits using physical conductors (e.g., metallic, optical fiber)shall be installed such that the outgoing and return conductors, exiting from andreturning to the control unit, respectively, are routed separately. The outgoing andreturn (redundant) circuit conductors shall be permitted in the same cable assembly(i.e., multi-conductor cable), enclosure, or raceway only under the followingconditions:

(1) For a distance not to exceed 10 ft (3.0 m) where the outgoing and returnconductors enter or exit the initiating device, notification appliance, or control unitenclosures

(2) For single raceway drops to individual devices or appliances

(3) For single raceway drops to multiple devices or appliances installed within a

single room not exceeding 1000 ft 2 (93 m 2 ) in area



The purpose of this public input is to clean up the wording of 12.3.7 to more accurately reflect the intent of the section.


















12.3.7*

Class A, N and Class X circuits using physical conductors (e.g., metallic, optical fiber)shall be installed such that the primary and redundant, or outgoing and returnconductors, exiting from and returning to the control unit, respectively, are routedseparately. The outgoing and return (or redundant) circuit conductors shall bepermitted in the same cable assembly (i.e., multi-conductor cable), enclosure, orraceway only under the following conditions:



(3) For single raceway drops to multiple devices or appliances installed within asingle room not exceeding 1000 ft2 (93 m2) in area


Questions concerning the acceptability of using Ethernet and other non-fire or non-MNS networks for fire alarm and signaling systems applications are being raised more and more. Because of these questions and the rapidly changing technology, the Task Group on Networks in FA/ECS was formed by the Correlating Committee to address the risk analysis, design, application, installation, and performance of networks and networking equipment used in fire alarm systems, fire EVACS and mass notification systems. This proposal and Annex material is a result of that effort.Some of the concerns that were raised during related discussions for the 2013 edition included: ground detection, system management, availability, and software control. These issues were discussed and the results are provided in the Task Group’s proposal.The task group reviewed the new Shared Pathway Designations added to Chapter 12 in 2013. The proposal addresses the type of network acceptable, reliability required, listings required and use of the network to connect devices or appliances or interfaced systems. The proposal is the recommendation by a unanimous vote of the Correlating Committee Task Group members that was comprised of TC members from Chapters 10, 14, 23, 24 and 26 as well as individuals outside of the committees.Wayne MooreA.J. CapowskiJoe L. CollinsDan HoronVic HummMichael PallettCharles PughRobert SchifilitiAviv SiegelLarry ShudakBob ElliottPaul CrowleyJeff SilveiraJeff Knight



Andrew Berezowski



Public Input No. 270-NFPA 72-2013 [New Section after 12.3.5] Class N Network Submission


















12.3.7 *




(3) For single raceway drops to multiple devices or (excluding devices usedto interface to emergency control functions) or appliances installed within a single

room not exceeding 1000 ft 2 (93 m 2 ) in area


Caution should be exercised when applying the third exception / allowance identified to separation of Class A and X feed and return conductors, i.e., “Where looped conduit / raceway systems are provided, single conduit / raceway drops to multiple devices or appliances installed within a single room not exceeding 1,000 ft2 in area are permitted.”

As written this exception would permit an entire room of emergency control function interface devices controlled by the fire alarm system to be installed on a circuite where the feed and return legs are installed in the same raceway for rooms less than 1,000 ft2 in area.

Where a circuit enters a room that contains emergency control function interface devices (i.e., control modules / relays connected to and programmed to shutdown HVAC units and other fire and life safety control functions), loss of both “legs” of this circuit could disable important fire and life safety control functions that might be essential for prevention of circulation of smoke or some other required operation, such as elevator recall functions.














12.3.7 *




(3) For single raceway drops to multiple devices or appliances installed within a

single room not exceeding 1000 ft 2 (93 m 2 ) in area


Deleting "raceway" in exceptions 2 and 3 makes the exceptions apply also to cables and enclosures. As written those two exceptions only apply to wiring in raceways, not to cables.


















12.3.8

Section 12.3.7(3) shall not be permitted to apply to circuits that are connected to emergencycontrol function interface devices.


Caution should be exercised when applying the third exception / allowance identified to separation of Class A and X feed and return conductors, i.e., “Where looped conduit / raceway systems are provided, single conduit / raceway drops to multiple devices or appliances installed within a single room not exceeding 1,000 ft2 in area are permitted.”

As written this exception would permit an entire room of emergency control function interface devices controlled by the fire alarm system to be installed on a circuite where the feed and return legs are installed in the same raceway for rooms less than 1,000 ft2 in area.

Where a circuit enters a room that contains emergency control function interface devices (i.e., control modules / relays connected to and programmed to shutdown HVAC units and other fire and life safety control functions), loss of both “legs” of this circuit could disable important fire and life safety control functions that might be essential for prevention of circulation of smoke or some other required operation, such as elevator recall functions.


















Public Input No. 295-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. 12.4 ]

12.4 Pathway Survivability.

All pathways shall comply with NFPA 70 , National Electrical Code .

12.4.1 Pathway Survivability Level 0.

Level 0 pathways shall not be required to have any provisions for pathway survivability.

12.4.2

Pathway Survivability Level 1.

Pathway survivability Level 1 shall consist of pathways in buildings that are fullyprotected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard forthe Installation of Sprink ler Systems , with any interconnecting conductors, cables, orother physical pathways installed in metal raceways.

Not used.


Pathway survivability Level 2 shall consist of one or more of the following:

(1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable

(2) 2-hour fire-rated cable system [electrical circuit protective system(s)]

(3) 2-hour fire-rated enclosure or protected area

2-hour performance

(1) Performance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction

(2) Any interconnecting conductors, cables, or other physical pathwaysinstalled in metal raceways in buildings that are fully protected by anautomatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for theInstallation of Sprinkler Systems .


Pathway survivability Level 3 shall consist of pathways in buildings that are fullyprotected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standardfor the Installation of Sprink ler Systems , and one or more of the following:




2-hour performance

(1) Performance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction





Pathway_Levels_TG_12.4.pdf Cover Sheet ✓


This public input has been created with input from the SIG-PRO Task Group on Wiring Systems. Members are: A.J. Capowski (Chair), Dan Horon, Sagiv- Weiss-Ishai, Jebediah Novak, Mark Hayes, Vic Humm and Jeff Van Keuren. The purpose of this public input is to eliminate the perceived hierarchy that was inadvertently created when the SIG-PRO committee first created pathway survivability levels for the 2010 edition of NFPA 72. As it was never the intent to create a hierarchy, the provisions from pathway survivability levels 1 and 2 are being consolidated.. As such, all options that previously existing in paragraph 6.9.10.4.3 of the 2007 edition of NFPA 72 are now listed as pathway survivability level 2 with one change. The change now permits any performance alternative as approved by the AHJ, instead of only those that mandate a 2 hour performance. This is because it is possible to construct buildings that are not rated for 2 hours that employ relocation or partial evacuation. Hence, the two proposed new annex notes. Note: Though pathway survivability level 1 has been eliminated, the task group felt it would be better to maintain pathway survivability level 2, rather than consolidate all requirements under pathway survivability level 1. But this is something the correlating committee can weigh in on.


Submitter Full Name:Joshua Elvove

Organization: [ Not Specified ]

Submittal Date: Thu May 16 08:10:22 EDT 2013


I, Joshua Elvove, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Joshua Elvove, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright




NFPA Public Input Form

NOTE: All Public Input must be received by 5:00 pm EST/EDST on the published Public Input Closing Date.

For further information on the standards-making process, please contact the Codes and Standards Administration at 617-984-7249 or visit www.nfpa.org/codes.

For technical assistance, please call NFPA at 1-800-344-3555

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

Log #:

Date Rec’d:

Date 5/15/22013 Name Joshua W. Elvove (on behalf of SIG-PRO TG) Tel. No.

Company NA Email j

Street Address

Please indicate organization represented (if any) NA

1. (a) Title of NFPA Standard

72, Fire Alarm & Signaling Code NFPA No. & Year 2016

(b) Section/Paragraph 12.4

2. Public Input Recommends (check one): new text revised text deleted text

3. Proposed Text of Public Input (include proposed new or revised wording, or identification of wording to be deleted): [Note: Proposed text should be in legislative format; i.e., use underscore to denote wording to be inserted (inserted wording) and strike-through to denote wording to be deleted (deleted wording).]

Revise Section 12.4 as follows 12.4 Pathway Survivability. All pathways shall comply with the NFPA 70, National Electrical Code. 12.4.1 Pathway Survivability Level 0. Level 0 pathways shall not be required to have any provisions for pathway survivability. 12.4.2 Not used Pathway Survivability Level 1. Pathway survivability Level 1 shall consist of pathways in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, with any interconnecting conductors, cables, or other physical pathways installed in metal raceways. 12.4.3 Pathway Survivability Level 2. Pathway survivability Level 2 shall consist of one or more of the following: (1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable (2) 2-hour fire-rated cable system [electrical circuit protective system(s)] (3) 2-hour fire-rated enclosure or protected area (4)* 2-hour pPerformance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction (5) Any interconnecting conductors, cables, or other physical pathways installed in metal raceways in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems 12.4.4 Pathway Survivability Level 3. Pathway survivability Level 3 shall consist of in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, and one or more of the following: (1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable (2) 2-hour fire-rated cable system [electrical circuit protective system(s)] (3) 2-hour fire-rated enclosure or protected area (4)* 2-hour pPerformance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction Add the following new annex material: A.12.4.3(4) A performance based alternative is needed because it is possible to construct a non-sprinklered, Type V(000) building that employs relocation or partial evacuation (e.g., a single story ambulatory health care occupancy) that wouldn’t warrant either a 2 hour fire resistance rated enclosure or 2 hour cable A.12.4.4(4) A performance based alternative is needed because it is possible to construct a sprinklered single story Type V(111) or multi-story Type II(111) building that employs relocation or partial evacuation (e.g., a health care occupancy) that wouldn’t warrant either a 2 hour fire resistance rated enclosure or 2 hour cable (i.e., a 1 hr enclosure would suffice)

4. Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Input: (Note: State the problem that would be resolved by your recommendation; give the specific reason for your Public Input, including copies of tests, research papers, fire experience, etc. If more than 200 words, it may be abstracted for publication.)

http://www.nfpa.org/codes


5. Copyright Assignment

(a) I am the author of the text or other material (such as illustrations, graphs) proposed in the Public Input.

(b) Some or all of the text or other material proposed in this Public Input was not authored by me. Its source is as follows: (please identify which material and provide complete information on its source)

I hereby grant and assign to the NFPA all and full rights in copyright in this Public Input (including both the Proposed Text and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand that I acquire no rights in any publication of NFPA in which this Public Input in this or another similar or analogous form is used. Except to the extent that I do not have authority to make an assignment in materials that I have identified in (b) above, I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Input and that I have full power and authority to enter into this assignment.

Signature (Required)

PLEASE USE SEPARATE FORM FOR EACH PUBLIC INPUT

To: Secretary, Standards Council National Fire Protection Association 1 Batterymarch Park ∙ Quincy, MA 02169-7471 OR

Fax to: (617) 770-3500 OR Email to: [email protected]

5/15/2013

mailto:[email protected]




12.4 Pathway Survivability.

All pathways shall comply with NFPA 70 , National Electrical Code .


Level 0 pathways shall not be required to have any provisions for pathway survivability.

12.4.2

* Pathway Survivability Level 1.

Pathway survivability Level 1 shall consist of pathways

in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance withNFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprink ler Systems , with any interconnectingconductors, cables, or other physical pathways installed in metal raceways

that utilize equipment, sytems or construction that provide a level ofsurvivability .

12.4.3

* Pathway Survivability Level 2.

Pathway survivability Level 2 shall consist of

one or more of the following:




(4) 2-hour performance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction


Pathway survivability Level 3 shall consist of pathways in buildings that are fullyprotected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard forthe Installation of Sprink ler Systems , and one or more of the following:





pathways that utilize redundant equipment, systems or construction thatprovide a level of survivability higher than that of Pathway Survivability Level1.





Pathway_Levels_je_121.4.pdf Cover Sheet ✓


When this committee developed pathway survivability levels, it was not meant to be hierarchical. For proof (or a reminder), see page 72-290 in the 2009 ROC in response to Comment 72-514, log 382.However, because of the numbering scheme used (levels 0 through 4) and an incorrect perception to a number of code users that all the 2 hr options in pathway level 2 are superior to the sprinkler option provided in pathway level 1, some chapters are excluding the latter as an equivalent option.The requirement for pathway levels are borne out of the section pertaining to circuits surviving an attack by fire which was previously contained in Chapter 6 of the 2007 edition of NFPA 72. In that edition, the four current pathway level 2 options and the pathway level 1 sprinkler option were all deemed equivalent.From the 2007 edition of NFPA 72:6.9.10.4.3 Where the separation of emergency voice/alarm control equipment locations results in the portions of the systemcontrolled by one location being dependent upon the control equipment in other locations, the circuits between the dependent controls shall be protected against attack by fire using one of the following methods:(1) A 2-hour fire rated circuit integrity (CI) cable(2) A 2-hour fire rated cable system (electrical circuit protective system)(3) Routing the cable through a 2-hour rated enclosure(4) Performance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction(5) Buildings fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, and with the interconnecting wiring or cables between the emergency voice/alarm communication control equipment locations installed inmetal raceways and in accordance Article 760 of NFPA 70The code needs to remove the hierarchical implication between pathway levels 1 and 2 once and for all by combining the two pathway levels. But it needs to go further and stop listing specific methods for meeting pathway survivability requirements and instead, use performance based language. If examples are needed, place them in the annex as I’ve proposed.Note: this public input is independent of the public input I submitted as part of a SIG-PRO task group. It’s different as it proposed to move all examples to the annex. Though I think this public input is viable on its own, I have no issue with the SIG-PRO task group’s PI should that be preferred by the TC.
















FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

Log #:

Date Rec’d:

Date 5/15/2013 Name Joshua W. Elvove Tel. No.

Company NA Email

Street Address







Revise Section 12.4 as follows 12.4 Pathway Survivability. All pathways shall comply with the NFPA 70, National Electrical Code. 12.4.1 Pathway Survivability Level 0. Level 0 pathways shall not be required to have any provisions for pathway survivability. 12.4.2* Pathway Survivability Level 1. Pathway survivability Level 1 shall consist of pathways that utilize equipment, systems or construction that provide a level of survivability in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, with any interconnecting conductors, cables, or other physical pathways installed in metal raceways. 12.4.3* Pathway Survivability Level 2. Pathway survivability Level 2 shall consist of one or more of the following: (1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable (2) 2-hour fire-rated cable system [electrical circuit protective system(s)] (3) 2-hour fire-rated enclosure or protected area (4) 2-hour performance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction 12.4.4 Pathway Survivability Level 3. Pathway survivability Level 3 shall consist of pathways that utilize redundant equipment, systems or construction that provide a level of survivability higher than that of Pathway Survivability Level 1. in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, and one or more of the following: (1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable (2) 2-hour fire-rated cable system [electrical circuit protective system(s)] (3) 2-hour fire-rated enclosure or protected area (4) 2-hour performance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction Add the following new annex material: A.12.4.2 Examples of pathway survivability level 1 could be: (1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable (2) 2-hour fire-rated cable system [electrical circuit protective system(s)] (3) A fire resistance rated enclosure or protected area (4) Performance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction (5) Any interconnecting conductors, cables, or other physical pathways installed in metal raceways in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems. In a one hour fire resistance rated building, it isn’t necessary to construct a 2 hour fire resistance rated enclosure or develop an alternative approach to meet a 2 hour performance. A.12.4.3 Examples of pathway survivability level 2 could be: (1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable or 2-hour fire-rated cable system [electrical circuit protective system(s)] in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler


Systems. (2) Installing any interconnecting conductors, cables, or other physical pathways installed in metal raceways in a 2-hour fire-rated enclosure and protected area in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems. (3) Performance alternatives that provide redundant protection as approved by the authority having jurisdiction


When this committee developed pathway survivability levels, it was not meant to be hierarchical. For proof (or a reminder), see page 72-290 in the 2009 ROC in response to Comment 72-514, log 382.

However, because of the numbering scheme used (levels 0 through 4) and an incorrect perception to a number of code users that all the 2 hr options in pathway level 2 are superior to the sprinkler option provided in pathway level 1, some chapters are excluding the latter as an equivalent option.

The requirement for pathway levels are borne out of the section pertaining to circuits surviving an attack by fire which was previously contained in Chapter 6 of the 2007 edition of NFPA 72. In that edition, the four current pathway level 2 options and the pathway level 1 sprinkler option were all deemed equivalent.

From the 2007 edition of NFPA 72: 6.9.10.4.3 Where the separation of emergency voice/alarm control equipment locations results in the portions of the system controlled by one location being dependent upon the control equipment in other locations, the circuits between the dependent controls shall be protected against attack by fire using one of the following methods: (1) A 2-hour fire rated circuit integrity (CI) cable (2) A 2-hour fire rated cable system (electrical circuit protective system) (3) Routing the cable through a 2-hour rated enclosure (4) Performance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction (5) Buildings fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, and with the interconnecting wiring or cables between the emergency voice/alarm communication control equipment locations installed in metal raceways and in accordance Article 760 of NFPA 70 The code needs to remove the hierarchical implication between pathway levels 1 and 2 once and for all by combining the two pathway levels. But it needs to go further and stop listing specific methods for meeting pathway survivability requirements and instead, use performance based language. If examples are needed, place them in the annex as I’ve proposed. Note: this public input is independent of the public input I submitted as part of a SIG-PRO task group. It’s different as it proposed to move all examples to the annex. Though I think this public input is viable on its own, I have no issue with the SIG-PRO task group’s PI should that be preferred by the TC.









5/15/2013







(1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) resistive cable





There is no longer any listed 2-hour fire-rated cirucit integrity (CI) cable available in the market place. Therefore, this reference to CI is no longer applicable. However, there is a listed 2-hour fire-resistive cable in the market place and therefore should be applicable..


Submitter Full Name:David Frable

Organization: US General Services Administration

Affilliation: US General Services Administration



I, David Frable, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am David Frable, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright




6/5/13 TerraView™








(4) Class A or Class X circuit in a fully protected building by an automatic sprinklersystem in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the installation of Sprink lersystems, where the outgoing and return (redundant) circuit conductors areinstalled in separate metal raceways.



Problem:1.In existing buildings, were the FA system is being upgraded to meet current codes, and level 2 Survivability is required, it is very difficult (not feasible) to provide 2-HR fire rated enclosures (option 3 in NFPA 72-2013 Sections 12.4.3 and 12.4.4) for horizontal conductors runs, such as from the Fire Command Center to the Riser, or to firefighter’s phone jacks located in elevator lobbies, etc.

2.Also when 2-HR rated CI cables or systems are not available or are very costly, options (1) and (2) in NFPA 72-2013 Sections 12.4.3 and 12.4.4 become not feasible as well

3.The two conditions above, if existing, leave only option (4) in NFPA 72-2013 Sections 12.4.3 and 12.4.4 as the only option for complying with Level 2 or 3 survivability requirements. However, this is a performance based option with no clear direction for a specific proposal that would be acceptable to the AHJ (A certain proposal may be acceptable to some AHJs but not for others)

Proposed Solution:

From the reasons above and from real life experience in San Francisco, existing High-Rise buildings having partial evacuation or relocation of occupants upon fire alarm emergencies, which are going through a Fire Alarm system upgrade to current codes, the SFFD (AHJ in SF) allows the proposed proposal/ PI for this section as a feasible solution: Providing Class A or Class X circuits in a fully sprinklered building per NFPA 13, where the outgoing and return conductors are installed in separate metal raceways. This solution provides a redundant path and mechanical protection for the system conductors and is considered as an acceptable alternative to level 2 or 3 survivability levels.



Organization: San Francisco Fire Department, Fire Protection Engineer, P.E., Code enforcer

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 21 21:30:10 EDT 2013






Pathway survivability Level 3 shall consist of pathways in buildings that are fullyprotected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard forthe Installation of Sprink ler Systems, and one or more of the following:

(1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) resistive cable





There is no longer any listed 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable available in th emarket place. Therefore, the refernece to CI cable is no longer applicable. However, there is a listed 2-hour fire-resistive cable avilable in the market place and therefore should be recognized.


Submitter Full Name:David Frable

Organization: US General Services Administration

Affilliation: US General Services Administration



I, David Frable, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am David Frable, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







12.6.1

Unless otherwise permitted or required by 12.6.3 through 12.6.14 , all means ofinterconnecting equipment, devices, and appliances and wiring connections shall bemonitored for the integrity of the interconnecting conductors or equivalent path so thatthe occurrence of a single open or a single ground-fault condition in the installationconductors or other signaling channels is automatically indicated within 200 seconds.

Exception: where it is permitted in other parts of this code to use Class C, Class D orClass E circuits.



The purpose of this public input is to clean up the wording of 12.6.1 and 12.6.2 to reflect that monitoring for integrity is in accordance with the class designations of the circuits. For example, a Class D circuit does not have to monitor for integrity


















12.6.1

Unless otherwise permitted or required by 12. 3.1 through 12.3. 6 and 12 . 6. 3through 12.6.14 , all means of interconnecting equipment, devices, and appliances andwiring connections shall be monitored for the integrity of the interconnecting conductorsor equivalent path so that the occurrence of a single open or a single ground-faultcondition in the installation conductors or other signaling channels is automaticallyindicated within 200 seconds.


Questions concerning the acceptability of using Ethernet and other non-fire or non-MNS networks for fire alarm and signaling systems applications are being raised more and more. Because of these questions and the rapidly changing technology, the Task Group on Networks in FA/ECS was formed by the Correlating Committee to address the risk analysis, design, application, installation, and performance of networks and networking equipment used in fire alarm systems, fire EVACS and mass notification systems. This proposal and Annex material is a result of that effort.Some of the concerns that were raised during related discussions for the 2013 edition included: ground detection, system management, availability, and software control. These issues were discussed and the results are provided in the Task Group’s proposal.The task group reviewed the new Shared Pathway Designations added to Chapter 12 in 2013. The proposal addresses the type of network acceptable, reliability required, listings required and use of the network to connect devices or appliances or interfaced systems. The proposal is the recommendation by a unanimous vote of the Correlating Committee Task Group members that was comprised of TC members from Chapters 10, 14, 23, 24 and 26 as well as individuals outside of the committees.Wayne MooreA.J. CapowskiJoe L. CollinsDan HoronVic HummMichael PallettCharles PughRobert SchifilitiAviv SiegelLarry ShudakBob ElliottPaul CrowleyJeff SilveiraJeff KnightAndrew Berezowski























12.6.2

Unless otherwise permitted or required by 12.6.3 through 12.6.14 , all means ofinterconnecting equipment, devices, and appliances and wiring connections shall bemonitored for the integrity of the interconnecting conductors or equivalent path so thatthe restoration to normal of a single open or a single ground-fault condition in theinstallation conductors or other signaling channels is automatically indicated within 200seconds. (SIG-FUN)

Exception: where it is permitted in other parts of this code to use Class C, Class D,or Class E circuits.



The purpose of this public input is to clean up the wording of 12.6.1 and 12.6.2 to reflect that monitoring for integrity is in accordance with the class designations of the circuits. For example, a Class D circuit does not have to monitor for integrity.


















12.6.11

Monitoring for integrity shall not be required for central for supervising stationcircuits serving notification appliances within a central supervising station.


There is no reason that this monitoring for integrity requirement should not apply to any form of supervising station location (central, proprietary or remote).


Submitter Full Name:Warren Olsen

Organization: Fire Safety Consultants, Inc.

Affilliation: Illinois Fire Inspectors Association



I, Warren Olsen, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Warren Olsen, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







12.6.14

Monitoring for integrity of the installation conductors for a ground-faultcondition shall not be required for the communications and transmissionchannels extending from a supervising station to a subsidiary station(s) orprotected premises, or both, that comply with the pathway requirements ofChapter 26 and are electrically isolated from the fire alarm system (or circuits)by a transmitter(s) , provided that a single ground-fault condition does not affect therequired operation of the fire alarm system and/or signaling system .



The purpose of this public input is to clean up the wording of 12.6.14 to clarify meaning and eliminate redundant requirements


















12.6.17

Where two or more systems are interconnected, the systems shall be connected usingClass A, B, N, or X circuits as described in Section 12.3 .












12.6.18

Where fire alarm control units are interconnected by an auxiliary alarm, supervisory, or troublerelay that uses clip-on or slide-on type terminals, the circuit shall be configured to providesupervision of the terminals so that their detachment from the auxiliary relay will result in atrouble indication at the master fire alarm control unit.


Several fire alarm panel manufacturers utilize "slip-on" or "clip-on" terminal strips for ease of maintenance. When this type terminal strip is used on output contacts for circuits supervised by another panel, the terminal strip can be removed without generating a signal. If the terminal strip is removed to facilitate service, it could be accidentally left off and prevent the transmission of signals.


Submitter Full Name:Herbert Hurst

Organization: Savannah River Nuclear Solutio



I, Herbert Hurst, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Herbert Hurst, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







12.7 Nomenclature.

To identify the properties of the system(s) interconnections and survivabilityrequirements, the following identification nomenclature shall be used:

(1) System(s) interconnections

(2) Survivability levels (not required if Level 0)

(3) Shared pathway levels (not required if Level 0)



The purpose of this public input is to clean up the wording of 12.7 and add an Annex paragraph.


















21.1* Application.

The provisions of Chapter 21 shall cover the minimum requirements and methods foremergency control function interfaces to fire alarm systems and emergencycommunications systems in accordance with this chapter.

NEW A. 21. 1 Fire alarm systems, signaling systems and emergencycommunications systems are often part of some larger, integrated system serving abuilding or area. Figure X shows examples of different individual systems that mightbe part of an integrated system. A fire alarm system might simply monitor the statusof one of the other individual systems. A fire alarm system might also provide someform of output to control some other individual system, such as a smoke controlsystem or an elevator controller. In some cases, the fire alarm system sharesinformation and control in two directions with some other individual system. NFPA 72covers only the fire alarm or signaling system in the circuits powered by it not any partof the other individual systems. See NFPA 4, Standard for Integrated Fire Protectionand Life Safety System Testing , for additional information on integrated systems.

[INSERT FIGURE FROM FILE Integrated Systems rev 5.png note: TERRAWOULD NOT ALLOW ME TO UPLOAD A FILE. I WILL EMAIL IT TO STAFF]

21. 1.1

The requirements of Chapters 7 , 10 , 17 , 18 , 23 , 24 , and 26 shall also apply,unless they are in conflict with this chapter.

21.1.2

The requirements of Chapter 14 shall apply.

21.1.3

The requirements of this chapter shall not apply to Chapter 29 unless otherwisenoted.



Integrated_Systems_rev_5.png Integrated Systems rev 5 ✓


New Annex text introduces the concepts of individual systems and integrated systems. The proposed figure is a revision of one that has made it through the first draft of NFPA 4.

Although NFPA 4 is not yet been approved as a standard it is in cycle one year ahead of NFPA 72. It will be voted on before NFPA 72 technical committees second draft meetings. It is easier to put in the reference now and make adjustments later than it would be to do the opposite.








21.2.6

The installation wiring between the fire alarm control unit and the emergency controlfunction interface device shall be Class A, Class B, Class N, Class D, or Class X inaccordance with Chapter 12 .












21.3.1

All initiating devices used to initiate fire fighters’ service recall Fire Alarm InitiatingDevices used to initiate Elevator Phase I Emergency Recall, shall beconnected to the to required building fire alarm system systems .


Problems:1) Inconsistency of Terms between NFPA 72 and the National Elevator Code ASME A17.1. The terms used in ASME A17.1 are: "Fire Alarm Initiating Devices (FAID)" and "Phase I Emergency Recall" 2) Some buildings are provided with Non-Required/Voluntary Building Fire Alarm systems (Such as low-rise office buildings, assembly buildings, such as churches with less than 300 occupants, etc.) - Currently this section does not differentiate between Required and NON-Required/Voluntary Building Fire Alarm systems3) This section requires to connect the FAIDs for Phase I emergency recall to the building fire alarm system, but there is no annex material clarifying what to do if the building FA system is not capable of expansion, or is not capable of Connecting to the required Phase I emergency recall FAIDs.

Proposed solution:1) Use the same terms in NFPA 72 related to Elevators Operation, as used in the national elevator code, ASME A17.12) Add an annex to section 21.3.1 clarifying: If a non-required/voluntary building FA system is provided, the required FAIDs used to initiate Elevator Phase I Emergency Recall shall be permitted to be connected to a separate dedicated function FA Control Unit dedicated for elevator Recall and Supervisory and labeled as such. The reason is - If the FA system is not required in the first place and is provided on a voluntary basis, it could be theoretically allowed to be removed and the Elevator recall devices would be only required to be connected to a dedicated Elevator Recall and supervisory control unit. Therefore there should not be a requirement to connect the recall devices to a non-required/voluntary FA system3) The annex material for this section should clarify that if the existing Required FA system is not capable of supporting the required recall devices, this devices may be connected to another control unit (sub-panel, slave unit, etc.) which will be tied-into the main control unit in a way that there is ONE building FA system. If an additional sub-panel/slave unit, etc. could not be connected to the main panel, this may trigger the upgrade or replacement of the existing building FA control unit.



Public Input No. 81-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 21.3.2]Same concepts used in thesesecions

Public Input No. 177-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No.3.3.102.2.1]

discuss same issues

Public Input No. 250-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No.21.3.10]






Organization: San Francisco Fire Department, P.E. Fire Protection Engineer

Submittal Date: Sun Mar 24 02:14:57 EDT 2013














21.3.2 *

In facilities without a building fire alarm system , initiating devices used to initiatefire fighters' service recall or in facilities provided with a non-required buildingfire alarm system, Fire Alarm Initiating Devices used to initiate Elevator Phase IEmergency Recall shall be connected to a dedicated function fire alarmcontrol unit that shall be designated as “elevator recall control and supervisorycontrol unit,” permanently identified on the dedicated function fire alarmcontrol unit and on the record drawings. A dedicated function fire alarmcontrol unit shall be permitted to serve more than one dedicated function.


Problems:1. Inconsistency of terms between NFPA 72 and the National Elevator Code ASME A17.1. The Terms used in ASME A17.1 are: "Fire Alarm Initiating Devices (FAID)" and "Phase I Emergency Recall"

2. Some buildings are provided with non-required/voluntary building FA systems (See my PI for the previous section 21.3.1 on this issue)

3. In many buildings without a building fire alarm system, there is an existing Sprinkler Waterflow and Supervisory system installed (dedicated FA control unit for sprinkler system monitoring). The requirement to provide a dedicated function FA control unit for each Fire safety function such as Elevator Recall, Sprinkler system monitoring, etc. would potentially create a situation where a few dedicated FA control units may be required to be installed in a facility where a single control unit (existing or new) may be capable of providing all these functions.

Proposed solutions:

1. Use the same terms in NFPA 72 related to elevator operation , as used in ASME A17.1

2. Where a facility is provided with a non-required/voluntary building FA system, the FAIDs used to initiate Elevator Phase I Emergency Recall should not be required to be tied-into this system, and should be permitted to be connected to a separate dedicated function FA control unit. The reason is that if the existing non-required FA system is not capable of expansion or is not capable of supporting the new FAIDs and control devices associated with the Elevator Phase I emergency recall, it may trigger a FA system upgrade or replacement in order to comply with the requirement indicated in section 21.3.1 ("shall be connected to the building fire alarm system"). However, since if the FA system is a non-required/voluntary building FA system and theoretically may be permitted to be removed, only a dedicated function FA control unit will be required per section 21.3.2, for the Elevator Recall associated devices. (See my PI to the previous section 21.3.1)

3. In many facilities without a building FA system, there are existing Sprinkler Waterflow and Supervisory systems (or Sprinkler monitoring systems). The intent of my proposed PI to this section is to allow the connection of the new required FAIDs and control devices associated with Elevator Recall, to the existing FA control unit, if it is capable of expansion, or to allow for a single FA control unit (existing or new) to serve more than one dedicated function. This will prevent the requirement of installing multiple dedicated FA control units in a single facility where only a single FA control unit (existing or new) is capable of supporting all these functions. An additional benefit of permitting the



connection of FAIDs and control devices used for Elevator recall to an existing Sprinkler Waterflow and supervisory control unit, is that in that case, these devices will be supervised by an off-premise supervising station which is required for sprinkler monitoring system, but is not required for a dedicated function Elevator Recall control and supervisory control unit.

4. If the proposal for item 3 above, that a dedicated function FA control unit will be permitted to serve more than one function will be acceptable to the TC, it shall be required to permanently designate and label this control unit on the record drawings and on the control unit itself with all the specific functions it serves, such as: "Sprinkler Waterflow AND Elevator Recall Control and Supervisory Control Unit"



Public Input No. 65-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 21.3.1]Same concepts used in thesesecions


discuss same issues

Public Input No. 178-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No.A.3.3.102.2.1]

Public Input No. 180-NFPA 72-2013 [New Section after21.3.2]

better clarify the intent of PI 81

Public Input No. 283-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 21.4.4]




Organization: San Francisco Fire Department, P.E., Fire Protection Engineer

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 28 10:49:47 EDT 2013














TITLE OF NEW CONTENT: New proposed Section 21.3.3:

In facilities provided with a non-required building fire alarm system, Fire Alarm InitiatingDevices used to initiate Elevator Phase I emergency recall shall be permitted to be connectedto a separate dedicated function fire alarm control unit that shall be designated as "elevatorrecall control and supervisory control unit," permanently identified on the dedicated functionfire alarm control unit and on the record drawings.


This proposed new section may better clarify my proposed PI for section 21.3.2



Public Input No. 81-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 21.3.2] better clarify the intent of PI 81


















21.3.3

Unless otherwise required by the authority having jurisdiction, only the elevatorlobby, elevator top of hoistway, and elevator machine room smoke ,elevator control room, and elevator control space smoke detectors, or otherautomatic fire detection as permitted by 21.3.9 , shall be used to recallelevators for fire fighters’ service. Exception : A waterflow switch shall be permitted toinitiate elevator recall upon activation of a sprinkler installed at the bottom of theelevator hoistway (the elevator pit), provided the waterflow switch and pit sprinkler areinstalled on a separately valved sprinkler line dedicated solely for protecting the elevatorpit, and the waterflow switch is provided without time-delay capability

perform elevator phase I emergency recall. For fire service access elevatorsdescribed in section 21.5, activation of any alarm initiating device connected tothe building fire alarm system, shall also initiate elevator phase 1 emergencyrecall .


Problem:1) Inconsistency of terms between NFPA 72 and the elevator code ASME A17.12) The exception for having the elevator recall upon waterflow switch activation of a pit sprinkler is not necessary and adds unnecessary equipment and costs.

Solution and substantiation:1) Use the same ASME A17.1 terms in NFPA 72 for consistency - The term in ASME A17.1 for automatic elevator recall is "elevator phase 1 emergency recall"

2) The requirements for elevator recall are originated in the elevator code ASME A17.1. Currently the elevator code requires to provide phase 1 emergency recall if sprinklers are installed in the hoistway. (The elevator pit is considered a part of the elevator hoistway per ASME A17.1 definition of an elevator hoistway). Since sprinklers may be installed at the top of the hoistway OR in the elevator pit (bottom of the hoistway) it is required by the elevator code to provide the phase 1 emergency recall function before or upon the elevator hoistway sprinkler activate. From this requirement it is clear that if sprinklers are not installed inside the elevator hoistway, the phase 1 emergency recall function will not be required.Since NFPA 13 is the governing code for sprinkler installation - it will determine when and where sprinklers will be required to be installed inside the elevator hoistway. Per NFPA 13-2013 Section 8.15.5 the only requirements for sprinklers to be installed inside elevator hoistways are at the top of freight elevator hoistways (traction or hydraulic type) and at the elevator pit of hydraulic elevators (since hydraulic elevators use combustible fluids - Class IIIB fluids per NFPA 30). There is no issue with the required sprinkler at the top of the hoistway of a freight elevator (smoke and heat detectors must be installed at the top of the hoistway and shunt trip function will be required). However, the issue with the pit sprinklers required for hydraulic elevators only (within 24 inches of the elevator pit) is that there is no known cases or data of hydraulic fluids fire in elevator pits (this is based on a research I have conducted with both the elevator and sprinkler industry - No one could provided me with a single data of single case of hydraulic fluid fire in an elevator pit). Based on this research, I have submitted a public input to the NFPA 13 TC asking to remove the requirement for pit sprinklers from NFPA 13.



To complete the cycle, and in order not to add unnecessary protection, equipment, costs to an elevator system, to protect against a risk that does not exist, I suggest to remove the specific requirement/exception from NFPA 72 for sprinkler waterflow switch activation of elevator phase 1 emergency recall. Also, if this would still be required for some reason, this current NFPA 72 section still allows the AHJ to require Phase 1 emergency recall upon other devices which include a sprinkler waterflow switch.

3) Be consistent with IBC requirements for phase 1 emergency recall for fire service access elevators - This is from IBC 2012:

3007.2 Phase I Emergency recall operation. Actuation of any building fire alarm-initiating device shall initiate Phase I emergency recall operation on all fire service access elevators in accordance with the requirements in ASME A17.1/CSA B44. All other elevators shall remain in normal service unless Phase I emergency recall operation is manually initiated by a separate, required three-position, key-operated "Fire Recall” switch or automatically initiated by the associated elevator lobby, hoistway or elevator machine room smoke detectors. In addition, if the building also contains occupant evacuation elevators in accordance with Section 3008, an independent, three-position, key-operated "Fire Recall” switch conforming to the applicable requirements in ASME A17.1/CSA B44 shall be provided at the designated level for each fire service access elevator.



Public Input No. 221-NFPA 72-2013 [New Section after 21.3.4] FAIDs in elevator hoistway








Submittal Date: Sat May 04 19:27:35 EDT 2013














Elevator Recall for firefighters' service

Fire Alarm Intitiating Device (s) used to initiate elevator phase 1 emergency reacll, shall beinstalled inside the elevator's hoistway where the hoisting machine/ motor is located inside theelevator's hoistway.


Problem:Currently, NFPA 72 does not permit the installation of smoke detectors at top of unsprinklered elevator hoistway. Since many machine-room-less elevators are currently being installed, there is an introduction of combustible materials/components inside the elevator hoistway. These materials/ components may be the suspension means such as steel coated belts, etc. or the hoisting machine itself (elevator motor ). The potential risk is where these combustible materials/components generate smoke inside the hoistway, this smoke may harm building occupants inside the elevator car.

Solution and substantiation:

NFPA 13-2013 addresses this issue regarding MRLs having combustible or limited combustible suspension means (steel coated belts) - There is an exception in NFPA 13-2013 Section 8.15.5 for the required sprinkler at the top of the elevator hoistway which requires a smoke detector at the top of the hoistway in lieu of the sprinkler to generate elevator phase 1 emergency recall. However, some (about 50% of the MRLs do not use combustible or limited-combustible suspension means and instead they are using steel ropes which are not considered as combustible materials. For those MRLs, NFPA 13 does not require sprinkler protection at the top of the hoistway (unless if they are Freight elevators) and therefore a smoke detector is not permitted to be installed at the top of these MRLs hoistway based on NFPA 72 for unsprinklered hoistway.However, since the hoisting machine or Elevator motor of these MRLs could be considered as a combustible component which potentially could generate smoke inside the hoistway (upon electrical short, overheating, etc.) this PI suggests the installation of fire alarm initiating device (FAID) at the top of the hoistway in a close proximity to the hoisting machine to generate an early elevator phase 1 emergency recall, and provide extra safety for occupants using the elevator under these emergency conditions.



Public Input No. 245-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No.21.3.6]

Require FAID inside elevatorhoistway



Organization: San Francisco Fire Department, Fire protection engineer, P.E.






Fire alarm initiating device (s) inside elevator's hoistway

Fire alarm initiating device (s) required to be installed inside elevator's hoistway by othersections of this code or by other codes and standards, shall be required to be accessible forrepair, service, testing and maintenance from outside the elevator's hoistway.



Service_Outside_hoistway.pdfCalifornia Elevator Safety Order - Title 8 Requirement for accessing FAID(s) from outside the hoistway

✓

Elevator_Hoistway_FAID.pdfThis PDF file shows a UL listed access door for FAIDs in elevator hoistway and an installation detail for this door and associated FAIDs

✓


Problem:Fire Alarm Initiating Devices (FAIDs) such as smoke detectors (for recall) and heat detectors (for shunt-trip) are required to be installed inside elevator hoistways, where sprinklers are installed in those hoistways (per NFPA 13 and per ASME A17.1). The requirments for the hoistways' FAIDs come from NFPA 72, from the elevator code - ASME A17.1, and from other building and fire codes and standards. However, currently, there is no indication or requirment in the elevator code ASME A17.1 or in other building and fire codes that these FAIDs must be accessible (for service, repair, testing, etc.) from outside the hoistway. Since there is no such requirement, FAIDs are currently being installed inside elevator hoistways and the only way to access them is to be inside the elevator hoistway (riding on top of the elvator car, work in the elevator pit, etc.). The Elevator hoistway is an extremely dangerous inviroment which requires only certified and well trained elevator mechanics to be in it. Fire Alarm system installers and service personnel should not be required to perform any work inside elevator hoistways on FAIDs. It is extremely dangerous to be inside an elevator hoistway. Also, a great deal of coordination with elevator personnel (and cost) is required anytime FAIDs are installed or serviced inside elevator hoistways. Certified elevator mechanics are required to be present together with the FA installing or service personnel to operate the elevator, take the elevator out of service, etc. any time hoistways' FAIDs are being installed, serviced or repaired.

Solution and Substantiation:

In California, the Elevator Safety Order has a requirement that all Hoistays' FAIDs must be accessible from outside the hoistway due to the above reasons. (See attached PDF file with CA Elevator Safety Order section)However, this requirment only applies in the State of California but it is not a national code requirment. Since NFPA 72 is a national FA code which lists the installation requirments for FAIDs - I suggest to include the California requirment in NFPA 72 and make it a national requirment for elevator hoistways FAIDs. This will significatlly reduce the life-safety risk for FA installers and service personnel, and cost to owners due to the great deal of required coordination

An Annex material may explain how to install these FAIDs (See attached PDF file)- Typically they are installed on a UL listed access door which is 90 minutes fire rated (since most elevator hoistways



are required to have 2-hour fire rating). The FAID is installed on the access door itself and when there

is a need for repair, testing or service, this access door is opened from outside the hoistway by a FA service personnel without the need to be inside the hoistway and without the need of coordination with a certified elevator mechanic.



Public Input No. 193-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 21.3.3] FAIDs in elevator hoistway






Submittal Date: Tue May 07 18:52:12 EDT 2013











CHAPTER 4. DIVISION OF INDUSTRIAL SAFETY Subchapter 6. Elevator Safety Orders GROUP 4. CONVEYANCE INSTALLATIONS FOR WHICH THE INSTALLATION CONTRACT WAS SIGNED ON OR AFTER MAY 1, 2008 ARTICLE 41. CONVEYANCES COVERED BY ASME A17.1-2004 Return to index New query

§ 3141.7. General Requirements.

(a) Conveyances shall comply with the following general requirements:

(1) Hoistway door unlocking devices described in ASME A17.1-2004, section 2.12.6, are prohibited on all conveyances;

(2) Emergency doors in blind hoistways as described in ASME A17.1-2004, section 2.11.1.2, and access panels as described in ASME A17.1-2004, section 2.11.1.4, are prohibited;

(3) All electrical equipment and wiring shall comply with CCR, Title 24, Part 3, California Electrical Code in effect at the time of installation;

(A) The light switch shall be located inside the machine room on the strike side of the machine room door;

(B) The light switch shall be located adjacent to the elevator pit access door within 18 inches to 36 inches above the access landing when access to the elevator pit is through the lowest landing door;

(C) Fire detecting systems for hoistways and the necessary wiring may be installed in hoistways, provided that the system is arranged to be serviced and repaired from outside the hoistway;

http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/index/T8index.asp�

http://www.dir.ca.gov/samples/search/query.htm�

1.

6/5/13 TerraView™



21.3.6

Smoke detectors shall not be installed in unsprinklered elevator hoistways unless theyare installed to activate the elevator hoistway smoke relief equipment or to protectelevator control spaces or elevator machinery spaces as required in 21 . 3.14.1(2) and21.3.14.2(2).


For correlation with the requirements in A17.1. Because of new technology, elevator machinery and elevator control spaces can now be located in elevator hoistways and as such, smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection as permitted by 21.3.9 would be required in the hoistway.


Submitter Full Name:Bruce Fraser

Organization: Fraser Fire Protection Service

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 07 10:38:32 EST 2013


I, Bruce Fraser, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Bruce Fraser, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







21.3.6

Smoke detectors shall not be installed in unsprinklered elevator hoistways unless theyare installed to activate the elevator hoistway smoke relief equipment , or unless theyare installed to initiate Elevator Phase I emergency recall where the elevator hoistingmachine/motor is located inside the elevator hoistway .


Problem:Where sprinkler are omitted or exempt from top of elevator hoistways by NFPA 13 or by other building codes, smoke detectors are required in lieu of the sprinklers to initiate elevator phase 1 emergency recall. This section creates a conflict with NFPA 13 and other building codes where the smoke detector is required in ansprinklered hoistway and it is not used to activate smoke relief equipment.

Solution and Substantiation:

Anytime where combustible equipment or components exist inside the elevator hoistway such as coated steel belts (suspention means) or hoisting machines (MRL elevators), the smoke detector at the top of the hoistway will generate early Phase 1 recall upon smoke detection in the hoistway, even when sprinklers are exempt from those hoistways (to avoid the shunt trip function)



Public Input No. 194-NFPA 72-2013 [New Section after21.3.3]

Require FAID inside elevatorhoistway



















21.3.7 *

When sprinklers are installed in elevator pits, automatic fire detection shall be installedto initiate elevator recall in accordance with 2.27.3.2.1(c) of ANSI/ASME A.17.1/CSAB44, Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators, and the following shall apply:

(1) Where sprinklers are located above the lowest level of recall, the fire detectiondevice shall be located at the top of the hoistway.

(2) Where sprinklers are located in the bottom of the hoistway (the pit), fire detectiondevice(s) shall be installed in the pit in accordance with Chapter 17 .

(3) Outputs to the elevator controller(s) shall comply with 21.3.14 .


Problem:The requirement for FAID to initiate elevator phase 1 emergency recall, where sprinklers are installed inside elevator hoistways, is listed in ASME A17.1. Per NFPA 13, this requirement only applies to hydraulic elevators, where pit sprinklers are required. However as I stated in previous PIs, and per research I have conducted, there are no data or known combustible hydraulic fluids fires in elevator pits.Therefore, this section in NFPA 72 is redundant to ASME A17.1 requirement and potentially create a great deal of cost to install pit FAIDs, especially if they will be required to be access for repair, testing and maintenance from outside the elevator pit.

Solution and Substantiation:Based on my previous PI's 193, 194, 221, and proposals to NFPA 13 and ASME a17.1, this section in NFPA 72 is not required, and it is already redundant to the requirement listed in ASME A17.1. Therfore, removing this section, will not change any pervious ASME A17.1 and NFPA 13 requirements.




Public Input No. 221-NFPA 72-2013 [New Section after 21.3.4]










21.3.8 *

Smoke detectors shall not be installed in elevator pits to initiate elevator recall unlessthe smoke detector is listed for the environment.


Problem:Same as the previous section. Smoke detectors should not be installed in elevator pits

Solution and substantiation:See PIs 193, 221 and 247
























21.3.9 *

If ambient conditions prohibit installation of automatic smoke detection used toinitiate elevator phase 1 emergency recall , other automatic fire detection shallalarm initiating devices shall be permitted.


Problemspecify the use of these devices and be consistent with the terms used in ASME A17.1

Solution clarify this section and be consistent with ASME A17.1 and previous PIs





















21.3.10

When actuated, any detector that any fire alarm initiating device that hasinitiated fire fighters’ recall elevator phase 1 emergency recall, shall also beannunciated at the building fire alarm control unit, or other or the fire alarmcontrol unit as described in 21.3.2 , and at required associated remoteannunciators.


Problem:To be consistent with the terms of ASME A17.1 and previous PIs (for example: waterflow switch could also initiate phase 1 recall and it is not detector)

Solution:Be consistent with ASME A17.1 and previous PIs











Submittal Date: Sun May 12 14:48:55 EDT 2013














21.3.11

Actuation of an elevator phase 1 emergency recall, from the elevatorhoistway lobby , elevator hoistway, elevator machine room, elevatormachinery space, elevator control space, or elevator control room smokedetectors, or other automatic fire detection as permitted by 21.3.9 fire alarminitiating device , shall cause separate and distinct visible annunciation at thebuilding fire alarm control unit, or the fire alarm control unit described in21.3.2 , and at required annunciators to alert fire fighters and other emergencypersonnel that the elevators are no longer safe to use at associatedremote annunciator(s) .


Problem:1) Inconsistency of terms between NFPA 72 and ASME A17.12) Elevator lobbies should also be announced separately (per floor, and per separate elevator group/ bank) on the FACU and required annunciators3) Per the elevator code, ASME A17.1 the elevator may be safe to use for firefighter even if the devices described in this section were activated (if they were not the initiating devices to initiate phase 1 emergency recall)

Solution and substantiation:

1) Consistency of terms between NFPA 72 and ASME A17.1 - Use the term Fire Alarm Initiating Device (FAID) instead of detectors - for initiating devices used to initiate elevator phase 1 emergency recall - FAID is term used in ASME A17.1 ( for example, a waterflow switch may be used to initiate elevator phase 1 emergency recall and it is included under the definition of FAID)

2) It is important to have separate signals at the FACU and annunciators associated with separate FAIDs. For example, many "old" existing elevators having primary floor elevator recall capability only, have all their lobby detectors connected to a single zone on the FACU. Upon activation of any of these smoke detectors, the elevator will recall to the primary floor. However, a distinct indication on what floor the fire was originated will not be available. Also, if a specific building/facility has different type elevators and/or multiple banks/ groups of elevators with multiple machine rooms/control rooms/etc. , it is important to receive a distinct separate signal from each elevator bank/group and from each machine room/control room, etc. on a floor by floor basis in order to help responding firefighters to quickly identify the location of the fire.3) The Elevator Code ASME A17.1 distinguishes between fires originated in the elevator machine room/ control room, etc. OR the elevator hoistway and fires originated in other locations in the building. The ASME A17.1 assumption is that it is extremely unlikely to have two separate fires starting simultaneously in two different locations in the building. Therefore, ASME A17.1 only requires the visual signals (firefighter's helmet) to illuminate intermittently, ONLY when the FAID which initiated phase 1 emergency recall was the FIRST INITIATING device to recall the elevators. If the fire started somewhere else in the building (not in the hoistway and not in the machine room/control rooms, etc.) the elevator may still be safe to use by responding firefighters and therefore the elevator car visual signal (firefighter helmet) shall not illuminate intermittently by ASME A17.1.The purpose of illuminating the elevator car visual warning intermittently, is to alert responding firefighters that the elevator is not safe to use (since the fire originated in the hoistway or in the



machine room/control room, etc.) - The instruction inside the elevator car regarding the visual warning light for firefighters (firefighter helmet), indicate: "when flashing exit the elevator" However, when the fire originated somewhere else in the building and the first FAID to recall the elevator was a lobby detector, the car visual warning will light SOLID (and will not flash intermittently) since the elevator may be safe to use by firefighters. Even, if the smoke migrated from the floor of origin, and activate the hoistway or the machine room/control room, etc. FAIDs as the SECOND device, the Visual warning shall remain SOLID and not flashing intermittently. The significance of not flashing the visual warning when the fire was not originated by the Hoistway or machine room/control room FAIDs is extremely important in high-rise buildings when firefighters relay on the elevators to perform their firefighting and rescue operation.Therefore, my proposal is that NFPA 72 will be limited to providing the signals from the elevator associated FAIDs to the elevator controller, and the elevator controller, based on ASME A17.1 requirements and based on the specific elevator capabilities, logic, etc. will determine WHEN and HOW to provide the in-car visual warning (SOLID OR Flashing firefighter's helmet light). There is a big confusion between fire alarm designers/installers and elevator personnel regarding this issues - it should be very clear in NFPA 72 that the Fire Alarm system only provides FAIDs inputs to the elevator controller and DOES NOT control the visual warning feature and any other elevator feature.























21.3.12

Where approved by the authority having jurisdiction, the detectors used to initiateelevator recall shall be permitted to initiate a supervisory signal in lieu of an alarmsignal.


Problem:This section is confusing to AHJs and may create inconsistencies between different AHJs and even within the same jurisdiction.The intent of allowing supervisory signals in lieu of alarm signals is not clear (If the intent is to minimize nuisance alarms caused by smoking, this section should be deleted since smoking is currently not allowed in most buildings). Also, a possible situation will be that the elevator will recall but the alarm signal will not sound which may be confusing to building occupants. Lastly, if the intent to allow for supervisory signals instead of alarm signals is due to nuisance alarms this means that the FA system is not designed or installed properly or it has a malfunction. The supervisory signal allowance will not resolve the system problem.

Solution and substantiation1) Deleting this section will create more consistency between different AHJs and between buildings having elevators and will prevent unnecessary confusion to building occupants and firefighters (firefighters will respond to some buildings having alarm signals but will not respond to other buildings having supervisory)2) In buildings or facilities without a building FA system, the FAIDs used to initiate elevator phase 1 emergency recall are required to be connected to a dedicated function FACU for elevator recall and supervisory. This dedicated function control unit may be a local unit (it is not required to be supervised off premise by a supervising station) - In this case only, when the dedicated FACU for elevator recall does not generate alarm signals in the building and does not call the fire department via a supervising station, there will not be a big difference if the FAIDs used to initiate elevator phase 1 emergency recall will report alarm OR supervisory signal on the dedicated function FACU for elevator recall and supervisory.
















21.3.13

Where lobby detectors are used for other than initiating elevator recall, the signalinitiated by the detector shall also initiate an alarm signal.


Problem:Same problem as the previous section - This may create inconsistencies between AHJs and between systems.

Solution and substantiation:1) ALL Elevator Lobby FAIDs used to initiate elevator phase 1 emergency recall should generate alarm signals upon activation and should not be permitted to generate supervisory signals regardless if they serve other functions such as the releasing of elevator lobby door hold-open devices.





















Public Input No. 260-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. 21.3.14 [Excluding any

Sub-Sections] ]

Separate outputs from the building fire alarm systems to the control unit, or the firealarm control unit described in 21.3.2, to the elevator controller(s) shall be provided toimplement elevator Phase I Emergency Recall Operation in accordance with Section2.27 of ANSI accordance with ANSI /ASME A17.1/CSA B44, Safety Code for Elevatorsand Escalators, as required as described in 21.3.14.1 through 21.3.14.3.


Problem:1) Be consistent with section 21.3.11 to include the dedicated FACU for elevator recall2) Do not include specific section from the Elevator Code since this section may be changed and since different jurisdictions enforce different editions of ASME A17.1

Solution:1)Include the dedicated function FACU for elevator recall 2) Delete the specific section in ASME A17.1



Public Input No. 273-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 21.3.14.2]




Organization: San Francisco Fire Department, Fire Protection engineer, P.E.;












6/5/13 TerraView™



21.3.14.1 Designated Level Recall.

For each elevator or group of elevators, an output shall be provided to signal elevatorrecall to the designated level in response to the following:

(1) Activation of smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection as permitted by21.3.9, located at any elevator lobby served by the elevator(s) other than thelobby at the designated level

(2) Activation of smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection as permitted by21.3.9, located at any elevator machine room, elevator machinery space, elevatorcontrol space, or elevator control room serving the elevator(s), except where suchrooms or spaces are located at the designated level

(3) Activation of smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection as permitted by21.3.9, located in the elevator hoistway serving the elevator where sprinklers areor elevator control spaces or elevator machinery spaces are located in thehoistway, unless otherwise specified in 21.3.14.2 (3)


For correlation with the requirements in A17.1. Because of new technology, elevator machinery and elevator control spaces can now be located in elevator hoistways and as such, smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection as permitted by 21.3.9 would be required in the hoistway.


Submitter Full Name:Bruce Fraser

Organization: Fraser Fire Protection Service

Submittal Date: Thu Mar 07 10:46:13 EST 2013


I, Bruce Fraser, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Bruce Fraser, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







21.3.14.1 Designated Level Recall.

For each elevator or group of elevators, an capable of designated level recall function inaccordance with ASME A17.1, an output shall be provided to signal elevator recall tothe designated level in response to the following:

(1) Activation of smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection as of fire alarminitiating device(s) as permitted by 21.3.9, located at any elevator lobby servedby the elevator(s) other than the lobby at the designated level

(2) Activation of smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection as of fire alarminitiating device(s) as permitted by 21.3.9, located at any elevator machine room,elevator machinery space, elevator control space, or elevator control room servingthe elevator(s), except where such rooms or spaces are located at the designatedlevel

Activation of smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection as

(3) , unless otherwise required by the authority having jurisdication.

(4) Activation of fire alarm initiating device(s) as permitted by 21.3.9, located in theelevator hoistway serving the elevator where sprinklers are located in thehoistway , unless otherwise specified in by the authority having jurisdicationand in 21.3.14.2 (3)


Problem:1) Some elevators are not capable of recall at all and therefore NFPA 72 should not require recall for these elevators.2) In some buildings the machine room or control room, etc. is on the same level of the designated level but is far away and the best recall floor is the designated levelSolution:Clarify that specific elevators must comply with the elevator code and may not be required to have recall.Specify that the AHJ has the final say on which floor the elevator recall, depends on the specific conditions of the elevator and the building it serves






Organization: San Francisco Fire Department, Fire Protection engineer, P.E.






21.3.14.2 Alternate Level Recall.

For each elevator or group of elevators, an output capable of Alternate Level Recallfunction in accordance with ASME A17.1, an output shall be provided to signal elevatorrecall to the alternate level in response to the following:

(1) Activation of smoke detectors, or automatic fire detection as of fire alarm initiatingdevice (s) as permitted by 21.3.9, located at the designated level lobby served bythe elevator(s)

(2) Activation of smoke detectors, or other automatic fire detection fire alarm initiatingdevice (s) as permitted by 21.3.9, located in the elevator machine room, elevatormachinery space, elevator control space, or elevator control room serving theelevator(s) if such rooms or spaces are located at the designated level, unlessotherwise required by the authority having jurisdictaion.

(3)


Problem:1) Some elevators are not capable of recall function at all and some elevators are only capable of Designated level recall (with no alternate recall function), therefore, NFPA 72 should not require recall for these elevators.2) The elevator machine room/control room, etc. could be located anywhere in the building and therefore the determination of the fire recall levels should be decided by the AHJ per the specific building and elevator configuration

Solution:1)Clarify that specific elevators must comply with ASME A17.1 and may not be required to have alternate level recall2) Clarify that recall levels should be decided by the AHJ



Public Input No. 260-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 21.3.14 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]

Public Input No. 262-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. A.21.3.14]





* Activation of the initiating devices identified in 21.3.14.1 (3) if they are installedat or below the lowest level of recall in the elevator hoistway and the alternate levelis located above the designated level, unless otherwise required by the authorityhaving jurisdictaion.




21.3.14.3 * Visual Warning.

For each elevator or group of elevators, an output(s) shall be provided for the elevatorvisual warning signal in response to the following:

(1) Activation of the elevator machine room, elevator machinery space, elevatorcontrol space, or elevator control room initiating devices identified in 21.3.14.1(2) or 21.3.14.2 (2)

(2) Activation of the elevator hoistway initiating devices identified in 21.3.14.1 (3) or21.3.14.2 (3)


Problem:This is a big problem related to the Elevator Visual Warning (firefighter helmet inside the elevator car) - The FA system should only provides FAIDs outputs to the elevator controller, and the elevator controller is responsible for activating the Visual Warning (if existing) either SOLID or Flashing upon specific FAIDs output signals. It should not be the intent (or interpretation) of NFPA 72 to require visual warning (for firefighters) if many elevators are not capable of this feature at all.

Solution:The requirements for FAIDs outputs to the elevator controller (s) are listed in the Elevator Code ASME A17.1 and Section 21.3.14.1 of NFPA 72. It should be clear that the FA system does not and should not generate "Elevator Visual Warning" - Many Elevators do not have this feature at all, and some of the newer elevators have only the "SOLID" light function while the newest elevators have SOLID and FLASHING features. Only the Elevator Code ASME A17.1 shall define the specific requirments of the elevator visual warning upon the specific elevators' types and the specific FAIDS output signals to the elevator controller



Public Input No. 260-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 21.3.14 [Excluding any Sub-Sections]]










21.4.1 *

Where heat detectors are used to shut down elevator power prior to sprinkleroperation, the detector shall upon or prior to the application of water fromsprinklers located in the elevator machine room, control room, control space orin the elevator hoistway, in accordance with ASME A17.1, the heatdetectors shall have both a lower temperature rating and a higher sensitivityas compared to the sprinkler sprinklers .


Problem:In consistency with the Elevator code ASME a17.1Solution:Make NFPA 72 requirements for shunt trip consistent with the Elevator code

















Public Input No. 568-NFPA 72-2013 [ New Section after 21.4 ]

Elevator Power Shut Down

Elevator power shut down shall not be permitted to be provided for elevators not having phase1 emergency recall capabilities or when phase 1 emergency recall function is not provided.


Problem:Many small or special use hydraulic elevators such as private residence elevators, limited use limited application elevators, etc. having sprinkers in their machine rooms are required to have power shunt trip upon or prior to the sprinkler activation per ASME A17.1. However, these elevators are exept from Fire Emergency Recall requirments, either the controller is not capable of recall function, recall key switch, etc, or if the controller is capable, but the function is not provided. Having shunt trip without reacll should be prohibited since there is a potential of trapping occupants inside these elevators

Solution:Shunt trip function should only be provided when Phase 1 Recall function is provided. The Automatic phase 1 recall will recall the elevator safely and open the elevator doors before shunt trip may occur


















21.4.2 *

If heat detectors are used to shut down elevator power upon or prior tosprinkler operation, the application of water from sprinkler (s) located in the elvatormachine room, control room, control space, or in the elvator hoistway, they shall beplaced within 24 in. (610 mm) of each sprinkler head and be installed in accordancewith the requirements of Chapter 17 . Alternatively, engineering methods, such asthose specified in Annex B , shall be permitted to be used to select and place heatdetectors to ensure response upon or prior to any sprinkler head operation under avariety of fire growth rate scenarios. The heat detectors must be accessible for service,repair, testing and maintenance from outside the elevator hoistway.


Problem 1) Inconsistency of terms between NFPA 72 and the elevator code ASME A17.1 2) Accessibility for these FAIDS

SolutionMake NFPA 72 consistent with elevator codeEnsure that any hoistway FAIDs shall be accessible from outside the hoistway since FA service and installation personnel should not be required to perform work inside the elevator hoistway



Public Input No. 261-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. A.21.3.7]


















21.4.4 *

Control circuits to shut down elevator power shall be monitored for thepresence of operating voltage. Loss of voltage to the control circuit for thedisconnecting means shall cause a supervisory signal to be indicated at thebuilding fire alarm control unit and required remote or at the control unitdescribed in section 21.3.2 and at all associated remote annunciators.


problem/solution:1 )Indicate building fire alarm control unit or control unit described in section...instead of "control unit"2) Delete "required" remote annunciators and indicate associated remote annunciators























21.4.5.6 Elevator Power shut down prohibited locations

Means for elevator power shutdown in accordance with ASME A17.1 shall not be installed onelevator systems used for fire service access elevators described in section 21.5 and onelevator systems used for occupant evacuation elevators described in section 21.6 of thiscode.


Problem: Elevator shunt trip shall not be provided for these type elevators per building and fire codesSolution: coordination with NFPA 72 to prohibit shunt trip for these elevators


















21.5.3 The fire alarm control panel shall have a dedicated LED to indicate smoke detector"alarm" condition in Emergency and/or Standby Electrical Power rooms.



20130507134501.pdf Cover Sheet ✓


21.5.1(1) addresses the need to know the status of main and emergency powr - 21.5.3 would build key information into that. Should there be smoke in these rooms then the automatic transfer switches, panelboards, control and power wiring may soon be subject to fire damage. This area is the nexus of critical wiring. Sprinkler activation in these rooms puts out the fire but most likely shorts out electrical circuitry. Electrical fires can start in these rooms. The doors to a fire-rated emergency room could be inadvertently left open to fire from outside the room. Unfortunately, storage items can be placed in these rooms. This information is critical to firefighters.


Submitter Full Name:DAVID SROKA

Organization:



I, DAVID SROKA, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am DAVID SROKA, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







Fire Service Access Elevator:

Emergency Resposne Plan: The building shall have an approved emergency responseplan in accordance with the applicable requirements of the authority having jurisdication. Theemergency response plan shall incorporate specific procedures for the firefighters using theseelevators and specific procedures for the occupants of these buildings.


Emergency response plan is required by IBC 2012 for occupant evacuation elevators and it should also be required for fire service access elevators.Coordination with Building and Fire Code and ASME A17.1 is required

For example, this is from IBC 2012 Section 3007:3007.2 Phase I Emergency recall operation. Actuation of any building fire alarm-initiating device shall initiate Phase I emergency recall operation on all fire service access elevators in accordance with the requirements in ASME A17.1/CSA B44. All other elevators shall remain in normal service unless Phase I emergency recall operation is manually initiated by a separate, required three-position, key-operated "Fire Recall” switch or automatically initiated by the associated elevator lobby, hoistway or elevator machine room smoke detectors. In addition, if the building also contains occupant evacuation elevators in accordance with Section 3008, an independent, three-position, key-operated "Fire Recall” switch conforming to the applicable requirements in ASME A17.1/CSA B44 shall be provided at the designated level for each fire service access elevator.

3007.5 Shunt trip. Means for elevator shutdown in accordance with Section 3006.5 shall not be installed on elevator systems used for fire service access elevators.

3007.8 Elevator system monitoring. The fire service access elevator shall be continuously monitored at the fire command center by a standard emergency service interface system meeting the requirements of NFPA 72.

3007.9 Electrical power. The following features serving each fire service access elevator shall be supplied by both normal power and Type 60/Class 2/Level 1 standby power:

1. Elevator equipment.2. Elevator hoistway lighting.3. Elevator machine room ventilation and cooling equipment.4. Elevator controller cooling equipment.



Organization: San Francisco Fire Department, Sagiv Weiss-Ishai, P.E.





Public Input No. 378-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. 21.6.2 [Excluding any Sub-

Sections] ]

Outputs from the fire alarm system to the elevator controller(s) shall be provided toimplement elevator occupant evacuation operation in accordance with Section 2.27 ofASME A17.1/CSA B44 (2013) , Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators, as requiredin 21.6.2.1 and 21.6.2.2.


Problem:Specific section in other code may change (2.27) and specific edition of the elevator code (13) may not be adopted by specific AHJSolution:Do not indicate specific sections and editions of the elevator code in NFP 72

Also:The building must have a Fire safety and evacuation plan. This is from IBC 2012 Section 3008: The building shall have an approved fire safety and evacuation plan in accordance with the applicable requirements of Section 404 of the International Fire Code. The fire safety and evacuation plan shall incorporate specific procedures for the occupants using evacuation elevators.


















21.7.2*

If connected to the fire alarm system serving the protected premises, all detectiondevices used to cause the operation of HVAC systems, smoke dampers, fire dampers,fan control, smoke doors, and or fire doors shall be monitored for integrity inaccordance with 10.6.9 and Section 12.6.


Changes based on our TC task group conclusions. Grammatical fixes for the compound sentence, and deletion of reference to Section 10.6.9 which is not relevant to the paragraph/requirement.


Submitter Full Name:Diane Doliber




I, Diane Doliber, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Diane Doliber, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







21.8.3

All door and shutter hold-open release and integral door and shutter release andclosure devices used for release service shall be monitored for integrity in accordancewith Section 12.6 .

Exception: Smoke detector and door and shutter hold-open release and integral doorand shutter release and closure devices pathways are designed according to Class Dof Section 12.3.4 .

The performance of the emergeny control functions shall comply with Section 21.2 .


Cross reference links to 21.2. 21.2 itself defines no measures for integrity monitoring but references to 12.6 (21.2.8) just as 21.8.2. Requirements for integrity monitoring should be referenced to 12.6 directly.Requirements to technical parameters (interconnection, power & voltage limitations and interferences) to be addressed separately linking to 21.2.

Exception: Would allow a total “fail safe” installation (including smoke detectors) instead of costly integrity monitoring.


Submitter Full Name:Andre Lickefett

Organization: Minimax GmbH & Co. KG

Affilliation: NFSA



I, Andre Lickefett, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Andre Lickefett, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







21.9.2

For all means of egress doors connected in accordance with 21.9.1 where secondarypower supplies of fire alarm control unit batteries units are used, they shall complywith 10.6.7.


Term “fire alarm control unit batteries” misleading (battery as group of devices).It should be made clear here that the second power supply of the FACU is meant. A second power supply could also come from a separate emergency power supply, a fuel cell or other independend sources.




Affilliation: NFSA















21.9.3*

Fire Secondary power supplies of fire alarm control unit batteries units shall not beutilized to maintain means of egress doors in the locked condition unless the fire alarmcontrol unit is arranged with circuitry and sufficient secondary power to ensure themeans of egress doors will unlock within 10 minutes of loss of primary power.


Term “fire alarm control unit batteries” misleading (battery as group of devices).It should be made clear here that the second power supply of the FACU is meant. A second power supply could also come from a separate emergency power supply, a fuel cell or other independend sources.




Affilliation: NFSA














Public Input No. 624-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. 23.2.2.1 [Excluding any

Sub-Sections] ]

A record of installed software and firmware version numbers shall be maintained at thelocation of the fire alarm control unit. prepared and maintained in accordance withChapter 7


NFPA has decided to place all Documentation requirements into Chapter 7


Submitter Full Name:Scott Jacobs

Organization: ISC Electronic Systems, Inc.



I, Scott Jacobs, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Scott Jacobs, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







23.3.2* Nonrequired (Voluntary) Systems and Components.

The features for a nonrequired system shall be established by the

system designer

Design Professional in Responsible Charge on the basis of the goals and objectivesintended by the system owner.

23.3.2.1

Nonrequired protected premises systems and components shall meet therequirements of this Code.

23.3.2.2

Nonrequired systems and components shall be identified on the record drawingsrequired in 7.2.1 (12).



NFPA_72_4_Public-Inputs_2013_03_26.pdf Cover Sheet ✓


The Design Professional in Responsible Charge is a proposal in Fundamentals, should that proposal be accepted. This section would change in responsibility.


Submitter Full Name:VINCE BACLAWSKI

Organization: NEMA

Submittal Date: Tue Mar 26 13:53:49 EDT 2013


I, VINCE BACLAWSKI, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and





By checking this box I aff irm that I am VINCE BACLAWSKI, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright






Public Input No. 231-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. 23.3.2 [Excluding any Sub-

Sections] ]

The features for a nonrequired system shall be established by the system designerDesign Professional in Responsible Charge on the basis of the goals and objectivesintended by the system owner.


This change will coordinate the language with the new proposed wording, Design Professional in Responsible Charge, proposed for Section 10.5.1.



Public Input No. 228-NFPA 72-2013[Section No. 10.5.1]

Change from system designer to Design Profession inResponsible Charge


Submitter Full Name:Thomas Hammerberg

Organization: Automatic Fire Alarm Association

Affilliation: Automatic Fire Alarm Association



I, Thomas Hammerberg, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all

and full rights in copyright in this Public Input (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and




By checking this box I aff irm that I am Thomas Hammerberg, and I agree to be legally bound by the above

Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this

box, I am creating an electronic signature that w ill, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and

effect as a handw ritten signature




23.3.3.2.1

In facilities without a building fire alarm system, a dedicated function fire(s) fire alarm system shall be permitted and shall not be required to include otherfunctions or features of a building fire alarm system.


To allow for more than one function such as a dedicated function fire alarm system could serve both sprinkler system monitoring AND elevator recall






Public Input No. 178-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. A.3.3.102.2.1]


















23.4.4 SLC Designations

23.4.4.1 Where more than one type of signaling line circuit (SLC) exists at a protectedpremises designers shall be permitted to differentiate between the various circuits’ functions,designs, survivability and performance.

23.4.4.2 When assigning different pathway classes, survivability and performance levels theindividual SLCs shall be designated as one of the following:

1. SLC-CN Control network pathways

2. SLC-RC Remote control pathways

3. SLC-AD Addressable device pathways

4. SLC-RA Remote annunciation pathways

5. SLC-OP Off premises supervisory station pathways

6. SLC-GW Gateway pathways

7. SLC-HB Hybrid combination pathways


This is the work of the SIG-PRO Committee Task Group assigned to review this section and provide updated language for consideration. Members of the Task Group include L. Belliveau, L. Shudak, D. Struck and C. Willms.

Due to the variety of possible types of signaling line circuits it is important to be able to differentiate various levels of function, design, and survivability for the individual circuits.

For example, for a given fire alarm system design, the functionality and reliability of the circuit path network between interconnected control units (i.e., SLC-CN) could be specified as a Class X while the circuit path between a control unit SLC termination point and addressable devices connected to the specific SLC controller (i.e., SLC-AD) could be specified as a Class A. With the same system, the circuit path between the protected premises and the supervisory station (i.e., SLC-OP) could be specified as a Class C and the circuit path between the protected premises fire alarm and signaling system and other building management systems (i.e., SLC-GW) could specified as a Class E depending on the applicable code requirements for the installation and the designer’s fire protection goals for the system.

Designers, AHJs, technicians, and electricians need a defined way to differentiate between the circuits and their performance it is in a clear concise and consistent manor. The assignment of SLC designations within the code would meet this objective.




















Public Input No. 279-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. 23.6 [Excluding any Sub-

Sections] ]

The assignment of class designations to signaling line circuits shall be based on theirperformance capabilities under abnormal (fault) conditions in accordance with therequirements for Class A, Class B, Class N, or Class X pathways specified in Chapter12.

























23.6.1 *

A single fault on a pathway connected to the addressable devices shall notcause the loss of the devices in more than 50 addressable devices one zone .





















23.6.1 *

A single fault on a pathway connected to the addressable devices shall not cause thelossSignaling line circuits used to directly monitor or control addressable initiatingdevices, addressable notification appliances or addressable control relays shallbe designed and installed so that a single fault shall not affect the operation ofmore than 50

addressable devices.initiating devices or notification appliances in any combination.

Exception: This requirement shall not apply to signaling line circuits that are used onlyto interconnect control units, regardless of the number of initiating devices, notificationappliances or control relays that might be connected to those control units.


This wording more clearly states the existing 2013 requirements for limiting SLCs to know more than 50 addresses. It extends the requirement to any type of addressable equipment other than control units. The exception makes it clear that control units are not covered by this requirement. Having the text regarding control units in the 2013 Annex does not create an enforceable exception to the 2013 rule. Also see the companion proposal for new 23.6.2 that further limits the design and installation of SLCs to a single floor or a single fire area of the building as is currently done for initiating device circuits and notification appliance circuits.





















23.6.1.1 A single fault on a Class N pathway connected to the addressable devicesshall not cause the loss of more than one addressable device.













Circuit types

23.6.1.1 ...Class B circuits must be less than 50 devices

23.6.1.2 Class A circuits must have a minimum of 1 isolator for each 50 devices


in a cl;ass b circuit the problem lies with short faults in the initial part of the circuit. the short will cause the devices within the initial 50 not to work, but will not supply power to the second or consecutive set of devices. If T-Tapped they must be T-Tapped at the start of the circuit. If they are T-Tapped anywhere after the 1st device, a short circuit fault in or near that device will take out all t-taps isolation after that point. The only way to insure more than 50 devices will operate as described in this section is to wire the devices Class A or X.


Submitter Full Name:Jack McNamara

Organization: Bosch Security Systems



I, Jack McNamara, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Jack McNamara, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







23.6.1.1

For the purpose of this section, each floor of the building shall be considered as a separatezone.





















23.6.1.2

For the purpose of this section, if a floor of the building is subdivided into multiple zones by fireor smoke barriers and the fire plan for the protected premises allows relocation of occupantsfrom the zone of origin to another zone on the same floor, each zone on the floor shall beconsidered as a separate zone.





















23.6.2 No area or zone shall be serviced solely by a single device when deployingClass N pathways, such that a single device failure would render an area or zoneincapable of initiating input signals, or receiving output signals.

Exception: When a risk analysis is performed to determine areas where a singledevice is sufficient and acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction.


























23.6.2

The loss of more than one zone shall be permitted on a documented performance-baseddesign approach in accordance with 7.3.7.





















New 23.6.2*

Signaling line circuits used to directly monitor or control addressable initiating devices,addressable notification appliances or addressable control relays shall be designed andinstalled so that a single fault shall not affect the operation of the initiating devices or notificationappliances on any other floor or in any other fire zone as defined in the applicable building, fireor life safety codes.

Exception: This requirement shall not apply to signaling line circuits that are used only tointerconnect control units, regardless of the number of initiating devices, notification appliancesor control relays that might be connected to those control units.

New A.23.6.2*

The limitations imposed by 23.6.1 and 23.6.2 can be achieved through careful planning, designand installation. One method would be to use multiple signaling line circuits, one for each firearea or floor of the building or for each 50 addresses. Other configurations might use a singlesignaling line circuit in a Class A configuration with properly located isolation modules.

The exception makes it clear that these requirements apply only to signaling line circuits thatdirectly serve addressable initiating devices, notification appliances and control relays. Thisrequirement does not apply to signaling line circuits used to interconnect control panels suchas in a campus wide monitoring system. This requirement also would not apply to a risercircuit used only to interconnect sub-control units as a part of a larger system.


The existing requirement for a limit of 50 addressable devices was arbitrary. 50 devices might cover an entire four- a five-story building. This new requirement combines with the existing 50 device limit to reduce the likelihood of common mode failures caused by fire in one area affecting the operation and communications to other areas. The proliferation of SLCs that can serve hundreds of initiating devices creates common mode failures that result in large parts of a building being without protection. Circuit choice, layout, design, installation and operation should be such that “all the eggs are NOT in a single basket”.














23.6.3 When a “device” as referenced by 23.6.2 is serviced only by a singlepathway, it shall terminate that pathway with no capability to connect additionalendpoint devices to the pathway.












23.6.3*

Performance-based designs submitted to the authority having jurisdiction for review andapproval shall include documentation, in an approved format, of each performance objective andapplicable scenario, together with technical substantiation used in establishing the proposedzone performance.





















23.6.4 Class N pathways shall be required to use Shared Pathway Level 3 as specifiedin Section 12.5.4.













23.6.4

The requirements in 23.6.1 shall not apply to the interconnection between enclosurescontaining control equipment and short-circuit fault isolation modules located within 3 feet ofeach other where the conductors are installed in metallic raceway or equivalently protectedagainst mechanical injury.





















23.6.5*

The requirements in 23.6.1 shall not apply to the addressable circuits that interconnect firealarm control units and / or transponders.


















6/5/13 TerraView™



Add a new circuit description type by inserting the following at 23.8 and renumberingappropriately: 23.8 Performance of Communication Interconnect Circuit (CICs). 23.8.1 The assignment of class designations to communication interconnect circuits shall bebased on their performance capabilities under abnormal (fault) conditions in accordance withthe requirements for Class A, Class B, Class C, or Class X pathways specified in Chapter 12and the requirements of 23.8.2 through 23.8.3. Communication interconnect circuits can becomprised of segments that are different Class pathways. The pathways class requirementsshall be designated as part of the system design. 23.8.2 Communication interconnect circuits must maintain alarm capability during theapplication of a single ground fault in addition to the designated pathway class requirements. 23.8.3 Communication interconnect circuits must report changes in the communicationpathway to maintain functionality due to fault conditions on Class A and Class X pathways.


NOTE: This proposal appeared as Comment 72-278 (Log #225) which was held from the A12 ROC on Proposal 72-292. This proposal should have been accept in principle. It brings up a need to uniquely identify the circuits between two control units. Generally, most people perceive that the SLC only exists between a control unit and the devices (i.e. IDCs, smoke detectors, contact monitors, emergency control function interface device, etc.). This traditional definition has been expanded to describe control unit to control unit communication. Therefore, it is imperative to create a control unit to control unit circuit definition to accommodate for this connection in terms of performance rather than a specific technology as originally proposed. The type of information and usage of circuits from loop devices to control unit is considerably different than between control units. The inclusion and subsequent definition of this new circuit should also replace the “communication link” that the SIG-ECS committee was forced to create since there was no applicable circuit type to describe the pathway to an MNS in 24.4.3.4.11. Additionally, several proposals in this cycle propose different restrictions for particular circuit types (see 72-55, 72-293, 72-294, etc.). Some of these include SLC restrictions and it was evident that the proposal was not meant to include circuits between control units, further showing the need for a new circuit designation. This requested change allows for a comprehensive performance based circuit to support modern communication technologies and not on electrical diagnostics.


Submitter Full Name:Doug Woosley

Organization: Valcom, Inc.

Submittal Date: Fri Dec 14 10:19:29 EST 2012


I, Doug Woosley, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full








23.8.1.1 10.11 * Actuation Time.

Actuation of alarm notification appliances or emergency voice communications,emergency control function interface devices, and signal annunciation at the protectedpremises fire alarm control unit and other designated locations shall occur within 10seconds after the activation of an initiating device.



23.8.1.1.pdf Cover Sheet ✓


This public combines two sections with the same function. This is public input initiated by the Correlating Committee of NFPA 72.


Submitter Full Name:Art Black

Organization: Carmel Fire Protection

Submittal Date: Tue Apr 23 10:40:55 EDT 2013


I, Art Black, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Art Black, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







23.8.2.2

Except as permitted in 23.8.2.3 , the fire alarm systems components shall bepermitted to share control equipment or shall be able to operate as stand-alonesubsystems, but, in any case, they shall be arranged to function as a single system.

23.8.2.2.1 Functions of multiple units of the same manufacturer or of panels of adifferent manufacturer shall apply only to the fire alarm or evacuation singal.

23.8.2.2.2 Interconnection of Supervisory Alarm or Trobule signals shall havesupervised communicating pathways and the method of interconnection shall complywith published instrcuts and listed accessories of each respective panel manufacturer.

23.8.2.2.3 Interconnecting methods that cannot comply with 23.8.2.2.2 shall have asupervised annunicator neat the control panel that is designated as the primary panel.

23.8.2.2.4 Restting procedures shall be posted on a durable placard beside eachrespective panel or annunicator.

28.8.2.2.5 Authorities having jurisdiction that includes local, regional, state, or federalshall provide signature concurrance of a resetting or interconnection procedure thatdoes not complywith each respective panel manufacturer on the final set of as-0builtrecord drawings.


This is the task grou work of Jebediah Novak and myself, which was assigned by Chairman Bunker to assist a request from Fundamental TC.


Submitter Full Name:Vic Humm

Organization: Vic Humm & Associates



I, Vic Humm, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Vic Humm, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







23.8.5.6.3

If a valve is installed in the connection between a sprinkler system and an initiatingdevice, the valve shall be supervised in accordance with 17.16.1 unless the valve isarranged to cause operation of the supervisory signal initiating device when it is in itsnon-normal position .NEW A.23.8.5.6.3 some ball valves installed on air pressure lines connected to a

pressure switch for dry pipe sprinkler systems or certain types of pre-action sprinklersystems will cause the air pressure that is trapped in the line between the valve and thesupervisory signal initiating device to bleed off when the valve is turned to isolate theinitiating device. This will cause the initiating device to operate and signal the low airsupervisory condition. This arrangement is permitted by other standards and provides afailsafe way to test a low air pressure signal without risking activation of the system.


Bleeder valves are commonly used to isolate air pressure supervisory switches. The proposed change and the annex text clarify that they are permitted and that they are fail safe.


















23.8.5.9.1

Where fire pumps are required to be monitored and a building fire alarmsystem is installed, a pump running signal shall be permitted to be a supervisoryor alarm signal be a supervisory signal .


This amendment is made to clarify the requirement for monitoring of the fire pump run signal. NFPA 72 has permissive language that does not provide clear direction as to what type of signal is required. The intent of this amendment is to make all of the fire pump signals supervisory. The assumption is that a fire pump run signal will follow a water flow switch signal, and since the water flow switch is required to transmit an alarm signal, the monitoring station will be notified of an alarm. Adding the second alarm from the fire pump can be confusing to responders, and is not necessary to initiate response.


Submitter Full Name:Kelly Nicolello

Organization: Western Regional Fire Code Dev

Submittal Date: Tue Apr 16 16:56:51 EDT 2013


I, Kelly Nicolello, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Kelly Nicolello, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







23.8.6.2.1

Visible signals shall not be required permitted in exit stair enclosures and exitpassageways.


Problem:Strobes should not be installed in stair and exit passageway enclosures since they may cause interruption to the evacuating occupantsSolution : change the phrase "shall not be required" to "shall not be permitted"


















Original Hide Markup

23.8.6.2.2

Visible fire alarm system visible signals shall not be required be permitted inelevator cars.


Problem:Fire alarm Strobes should not be installed inside elevator cars - they may harm and confuse the occupants using the elevators.Also, upon elevator phase 1 emergency recall (in newer elevators), a visual warning signal (firefighter helmet inside the car) is illuminating and there is also an audible signal (buzzer) while the elevator is under recall conditionSolution:Specify that FA visual signal shall not be permitted in elevator cars

Technical Committee Review - Public Input Stage

Create a First Revision, Committee Input, or make a Committee Statement affecting thisPI

Create Immediately create based only on Public Input No. 382-NFPA 72-2013

Add Add this Public Input to cart








Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication

of the NFPA in w hich this Public Input in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby w arrant that I am

the author of this Public Input and that I have full pow er and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.



creating an electronic signature that w ill, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as

a handw ritten signature

Print Reload Page Close

/TerraView/Content/72-2013.ditamap/2/C1368923347364.xml




23.16.2 Power Supplies.

A primary battery (dry cell) shall be permitted to be used as the sole power source of alow source for equipment incorporating a low -power radio transmitter where all of thefollowing conditions are met:

(1) Each transmitter radio shall serve only one device and shall be individuallyidentified at the receiver/fire alarm system control unit.

(2) The battery shall be capable of operating the low-power radio transmitter for andits associated device for not less than 1 year before the battery depletionthreshold is reached.

(3) A low battery depletion signal shall be transmitted before the battery has beendepleted to a level below that required to support alarm transmission after 7additional days of nonalarm operation device is no longer capable of providing 7days of normal operation followed by the signaling of a single-off normal event .This signal shall be distinctive from alarm, supervisory, tamper, and troublesignals; shall visibly identify the affected low-power radio transmitter; , and, whensilenced, shall automatically re-sound at least once every 4 hours.

(4) Catastrophic (open or short) battery failure shall cause a trouble signal identifyingthe affected low-power radio transmitter at its receiver/fire alarm at the systemcontrol unit. When silenced, the trouble signal shall automatically re-sound atleast once every 4 hours.

(5) Any mode of failure of a primary battery in a low-power radio transmitter shallradio shall not affect any other low-power radio transmitter .


Wireless systems are now incorporating two-way communications. Use of the term radio and deletion of the term tramsmitter reflects the two-way aspect of this communcation. Revised the text to use defined terms. The 1-year battery requirement should also aply to the device being served by the radio (e.g. smoke detector). Additional revisions for clarity.



Public Input No. 576-NFPA 72-2013 [Section No. 23.16.3] Similar change and substantiation



Submitter Full Name:Andrew Berezowski

Organization: Honeywell Fire Systems






23.16.3 Alarm Signals.

23.16.3.1 *

When a wirless inititating device is actuated,

each

its low-power

radio transmitter shall automatically

radio shall transmit an alarm signal.

23.16.3.2

Each low-power

radio transmitter shall

radio shall automatically repeat alarm

transmission

transmissions at intervals not exceeding 60 seconds until the initiating deviceis returned to its nonalarm condition.

23.16.3.3

Fire alarm signals shall have priority over all other signals.

23.16.3.4

The maximum allowable response delay from activation of an initiatingdevice to receipt and display by the

receiver/fire alarm

system control unit shall be 10 seconds.

23.16.3.5 *

A fire alarm signal from a low-power

radio transmitter shall

radio shall latch at its receiver/fire alarm control unit until manually resetand shall identify the particular initiating device in alarm.


Wireless systems are now incorporating two-way communications. Use of the term radio and deletion of the term transmitter reflects the two-way aspect of this communcation.











23.16.4 Monitoring for Integrity.

23.16.4.1

The low-power radio

transmitter

shall be specifically listed as using

a transmission

a communication method that is highly resistant to misinterpretation ofsimultaneous transmissions and to interference (e.g., impulse noise andadjacent channel interference).

23.16.4.2

The occurrence of any single fault that

disables transmission

disables communication between any low-power

radio transmitter and the receiver/fire alarm

radio and the system control unit shall cause a latching trouble signal within200 seconds.

Exception : Until the expiration date for this exception of June 30, 2013, the timeperiod for a low-power radio transmitter with only a single, connected alarm-initiatingdevice shall be permitted to be increased to four times the minimum time intervalpermitted for a 1-second transmission up to the following:

(1) 4 hours maximum for a transmitter serving a single initiating device

(2) 4 hours maximum for a retransmission device (repeater), where disabling of therepeater or its transmission does not prevent the receipt of signals at thereceiver/fire alarm control unit from any initiating device transmitter.

23.16.4.3

A single fault on the signaling channel shall not cause an alarm signal.

23.16.4.4

The

periodic transmission

periodic communication required to comply with 23.16.4.2

from a low-power radio transmitter

shall ensure successful alarm transmission capability.

23.16.4.5

Removal of a low-power

radio transmitter from



radio from its installed location shall cause immediate transmission of adistinctive supervisory signal that indicates its removal and individuallyidentifies the affected device.

23.16.4.6

Reception of any unwanted (interfering) transmission by a retransmissiondevice (repeater) or by the

main receiver/

system control unit, for a continuous period of 20 seconds or more, shallcause an audible and visible trouble indication at the

main receiver/

system control unit.

This indication

23.16.4.7 The indication required by 23.16.4.6 shall identify the specific troublecondition as an interfering signal.


Wireless systems are now incorporating two-way communications. Use of the term radio and deletion of the term tramsmitter reflects the two-way aspect of this communcation. The text has been revised for consitency.









I, Andrew Berezow ski, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Andrew Berezow ski, and I agree to be legally bound by the above







23.16.4.5

Removal of a low-power radio transmitter from its installed location shall causeimmediate transmission of a distinctive supervisory trouble signal that indicatesits removal and individually identifies the affected device.



72_original.pdf original comment ✓


When a wireless device is removed it typically sends a tamper signal to the control panel. Tamper and supervisory are common with suppression terminology. When a wireless device is connected toa sprinkler superviosry switch it indicates a supervisory signal on the control unit. By changing the wording to trouble upon removal it eliminates misinterpretation.


Submitter Full Name:SCOTT BARRETT

Organization: CWSI



I, SCOTT BARRETT, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and





By checking this box I aff irm that I am SCOTT BARRETT, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







23.16.5 Wireless Output Signals from Receiver/Control .

When the receiver/ system control unit is used to actuate remote appliances devices ,such as notification appliances and relays, by wireless means, the remote appliancesshall meet the following requirements:

(1) Power supplies shall comply with Chapter 10 or the requirements of 23.16.2.

(2) All monitoring for integrity requirements of Chapter 10, Chapter 12, Chapter 23,or 23.16.4 shall apply.

(3) The maximum allowable response delay from activation of an initiating device toactivation of required alarm functions shall be 10 seconds.

(4) Each receiver/ system control unit shall automatically repeat alarm transmissionoutput signals at intervals not exceeding 60 seconds or until confirmation that theoutput appliance output device has received the alarm signal.

(5) The appliances The devices shall continue to operate (latch-in) until manuallyreset at the receiver/ system control unit .


Revised to use defined terminology.






I, Andrew Berezow ski, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Andrew Berezow ski, and I agree to be legally bound by the above






Public Input No. 178-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. A.3.3.102.2.1 ]

A.3.3.102.2.1 Dedicated Function Fire Alarm Control Unit.

Examples of A dedicataed function fire alarm control unit could serve more than oneemergency control function, such as a dedicated function fire alarm control unit includean automatic sprinkler alarm and supervisory control unit or an elevator recall controland supervisory control unit. could serve as a single control unit for sprinkler systemmonitoring and elevator recall. In that case the control unit should be labeled as:"Sprinkler Waterflow AND Elevator Recall Control and Supervisory Control Unit"


To be consistent with PI # 177 and the proposed revised defination for dedicated function FA control unit.





















Public Input No. 203-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. A.12.3 ]

A.12.3

The intent of the circuit designations is not to create a hierarchal ranking; rather it is toprovide guidance on the levels of performance.

The initiating device circuit, signaling line circuit, and notification appliance circuitperformance class/style tables from previous editions of the Code have been includedas Table A.12.3(a) , Table A.12.3(b) , and Table A.12.3(c) but have been modified toinclude the enhanced class references. These tables reflect the classifications asapplied to fire alarm systems. Some of the operations are a combination of therequirements of Chapter 12 in conjunction with the requirements of Chapters 10 and23 . Singular ground-fault conditions that do not affect operation of the pathway are notspecifically covered in Chapter 12 , but are covered by the requirements of otherchapters. Users of the Chapter 12 designations should review whether there are otherabnormal conditions not specified in Chapter 12 that the pathways need to annunciateand operate through for their application.

Table A.12.3(a) Performance of Initiating Device Circuits (IDCs)

NFPA 72-2007 Class B A NFPA 72-2010Class B A Alm Trbl ARC Alm Trbl ARC Abnormal Condition 1 2 3 4 5 6 Singleopen — X— — XR Single ground — XR — XR

Alm: Alarm. Trbl: Trouble. ARC: Alarm receipt capability during abnormal condition. R:Required capability. X: Indication required at protected premises and as required byChapter 26.

Table A.12.3(b) Performance of Signaling Line Circuits (SLCs)

NFPA 72-2007 Class B A A Style 4 6 7 NFPA 72-2010Class B A XAlarm Trouble ARC Alarm Trouble ARC Alarm Trouble ARC AbnormalCondition 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Single open — X— — XR — XR Singleground — XR — XR — XR Wire-to-wire short — X— — X— — XR Wire-to-wire shortand open — X— — X— X— Wire-to-wire short and ground — X— — X— — X— Openand ground — X— — XR — XR Loss of carrier (if used)/channelinterface — X— — X— — X—

ARC: Alarm receipt capability during abnormal condition. R: Required capability. X:Indication required at protected premises and as required by Chapter 26.

Table A.12.3(c) Notification Appliance Circuits (NACs)

NFPA 72-2007 Class B A NFPA 72-2010 Class B A Trouble Indications at ProtectivePremise Alarm Capability During Abnormal Condition Trouble Indications at ProtectivePremise Alarm Capability During Abnormal Condition Abnormal Condition 1 2 3 4 Singleopen X- XR Single ground XR XR Wire-to-wire short X- X-

X: Indication required at protected premises and as required by Chapter 26. R: Requiredcapability.


This public input has been created by the SIG-PRO Task Group on Wiring Systems. Members are: A.J. Capowski (Chair), Dan Horon, Sagiv Weiss-Ishai, Jebediah Novak, Mark Hayes, Vic Humm and



Jeff Van Keuren.

The purpose of this public input is to improve the Annex material for section 12.3. It deletes the old style tables and rewrites some of the Annex material to provide better clarity.

















Public Input No. 204-NFPA 72-2013 [ Section No. A.12.3.1 ]

A.12.3.1

The Class A references for initiating device circuit and notification appliance circuitperformance have been changed to eliminate the need for alarm receipt capabilityduring a single ground or annunciation of a single ground fault. The signaling linecircuit performance has changed to provide a clear separation between the Class AStyle 6 and Class A Style 7 performance. The Class A Style 7 performance is nowdefined as Class X.

Fiber optic or wireless pathways are examples of Class A circuitry notimpaired by earth ground connection, and short-circuits, and therefore donot annunciate those conditions as a fault. Users of the code are advised thatfire alarm circuits still require alarm receipt capability during a single ground. SeeChapter 23 .









I, Anthony Capow ski, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all

and full rights in copyright in this Public Input (including both the 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 the NFPA in w hich this Public Input in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby

w arrant that I am the author of this Public Input and that I have full pow er and authority to enter into this

copyright assignment.

By checking this box I aff irm that I am Anthony Capow ski, and I agree to be legally bound by the above

Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking

this box, I am creating an electronic signature that w ill, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal

force and effect as a handw ritten signature




A.12.3.2

The Class B references for initiating device circuit, signaling line circuit, andnotification appliance circuit performance have been changed to eliminate the needfor alarm receipt capability during a single ground or annunciation of a singleground fault. Users of the code are advised that fire alarm circuits still require alarmreceipt capability during a single ground. (See Chapter 23 .)


Delete Section





















A.12.3.3

The Class C reference is new and is intended to describe technologies thatsupervise the communication pathway by polling or continuous communication“handshaking” such as the following:

(1) Fire alarm control unit or supervising station connections to a wired LAN,WAN, or Internet

(2) Fire alarm control unit or supervising station connections to a wireless LAN,WAN, and Internet

(3) Fire alarm control unit or supervising station connections to a wireless(proprietary communications)

(4) Fire alarm control unit digital alarm communicator transmitter or supervisingstation digital alarm communicator receiver connections to the publicswitched telephone network

Individual pathway segments are not required to be monitored. Supervision isaccomplished by end to end communications.






















A.12.3.3

The Class C reference is new and is intended to describe technologies thatsupervise the communication pathway by polling or continuous communication“handshaking” such as the following:

(1) Fire alarm control unit or supervising station connections to a wired LAN,WAN, or Internet

(2) Fire alarm control unit or supervising station connections to a wireless LAN,WAN, and Internet

(3) Fire alarm control unit or supervising station connections to a wireless(proprietary communications)

(4) Fire alarm control unit digital alarm communicator transmitter or supervisingstation digital alarm communicator receiver connections to the publicswitched telephone network

Individual pathway segments are not required to be monitored. Supervision isaccomplished by end to end communications.


Class C is no longer "new"






I, Michael Pallett, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and


Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any





Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I

am creating an electronic signature that w ill, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and





A.12.3.4

The Class D reference is intended to describe pathways that are not supervised buthave a fail-safe operation that performs the intended function when the connection islost. Examples of such pathways include the following:

(1) Power to door holders where interruption of the power results in the door closing

(2) Power to locking hardware that release upon an open circuit or fire alarmoperation





















A.12.3.5

The Class E reference is new and is intended to describe pathways that do notrequire supervision as described in Section 12.6 .





















A.12.3.5

The Class E reference is new and is intended to describe pathways that do notrequire supervision as described in Section 12.6 .


Class E is no longer "new"


















A.12.3.6

The Class X reference is new and is intended to describe pathways as described asClass A Style 7 of the signaling line circuit performance of Table A.12.3(b) . (Also seeA.12.3 .)


Delete section



















Public Input No. 290-NFPA 72-2013 [ New Section after A.12.3.5 ]

Class N Annex Material

A.12.3.6 (1) Class N consists of pathways between control equipment and devices. Thepathways are comprised of metallic conductor communications cable, such as a 100 ?balanced twisted-pair (e.g., Category 5E) including single pair or multi-pair cable, or othercommunications media such as optical fiber cable or wireless transmission, or a combinationof two or more of these. Pathways consists of uninterrupted communications media betweencontrol equipment and an endpoint device, or consists of a network of multiple interconnectedcommunications media pathway segments connecting multiple devices. Media pathwaysegments are created by the use of transmission equipment such as Ethernet switches,wireless repeaters, or media converters that interrupt an otherwise continuous pathway. Itshould be noted that the requirements for Class N pathway transmission equipment are notcovered by Chapter 12, but by other Chapters in NFPA 72.

A network of pathway segments are also described as Primary Pathway Segments,Redundant Pathway Segments, or Non-Designated Pathway Segments. Primary andRedundant Pathways, from control equipment to each device, are independently andcontinuously verified for their ability to support end to end communications to and from eachendpoint device. Each device will be provided a Primary Pathway consisting of one or morepathway segments. For Primary Pathway Segments that services more than one device,additional Redundant Pathway Segments provide alternate verified communication pathways tothe devices. Should any Primary Pathway Segment fail, communications is supported by theRedundant Pathway Segments. Should either a Primary or Redundant Pathway Segment fail,trouble will be indicated by virtue of the continuous verification of all Primary and RedundantPathway Segments. The Redundant Pathway Segments are generally independent and do notnormally share media with the Primary Pathways. However, there are exceptions such asdifferent frequencies for wireless, or ring topologies (explained below).

There is an opportunity to enhance the robustness of a Class N network by providingphysically distinct pathway segments (i.e. an alternate conduit, or cable tray route, or wirelesstransmission frequency range, or a combination of distinct media). It is also permissible toprovide other Non-Designated Pathway Segments. Additional pathway segments, in excess ofthe minimum requirements of Class N, increase the overall robustness of the network, and areoften desirable. However, since these additional pathway segments exceed the minimumequipment standards, there is no intention to create an additional monitoring burden, soverification of these pathways is optional.

For Class N, where a conductor-based media is used, it is not the intention to monitor faultson individual conductors, but rather to monitor the operational capability and performance of thepathway as a whole. Unlike Class C, where multiple pathways are not required, for Class Nsome pathway segments that carry communications for multiple devices (such as EthernetUplinks or Backbones) will have Redundant Pathway Segments present. The intention is thatany one pathway segment can fail without a loss in operational capability to more than onedevice. For example, connections to control equipment (Fire Alarm Control Units, ACUs, orECCU), where any interruption in communications could potentially affect all devices, wouldhave Redundant Pathway Segments. Additionally, Backbone and Uplink pathway segmentsthat supports communications for more than one device, positioned between transmissionequipment would also have a Redundant Pathway Segment. But the requirement forRedundant Pathway Segments does not apply to those pathway segments used to service asingle device (see Figure A.12.3.6 (1)(a)).

The term “devices” is used generically in this section refers to endpoint devices, and includes:



• input components such as alarm initiating switches, sensors,

• output components such as Ethernet speakers ( i.e. IEEE 802.3af PoE speakers),strobes, textual signage, audio amplifiers.

Transmission equipment (e.g., Media Converters, Ethernet switches, patch panels, cross-connects) are not considered devices with respect to Class N Pathways.

The Audio Amplifier example is included to explain a type of addressable device that mayreceive a digital audio input from the Class N Pathway, but provide a Notification ApplianceCircuit (NAC) output to support Class A, B or X speaker connections. Other similar devicesare also possible to provide alternate Class Pathway connections for strobes (NACs) orInitiating Devices (IDCs). From the perspective of the Class N pathway, this is considered anendpoint device. However, since these types of endpoints may support multiple NotificationAppliance Devices or Initiating Devices they are subject to the Redundant Pathway Segmentrequirement and are provided with dual pathway connections.

Control equipment connected to a Class N network for communications with devices wouldgenerally utilize Redundant Pathway Segments. Control equipment connected to other controlequipment on a Class N network would utilize Redundant Pathway Segments if the controlequipment was dependent on any of the pathway segments such that a failure of a PrimaryPathway Segment in-between control equipment could impair the operation of the controlequipment (see Figure A.12.3.6 (1)(b)).

Another utilization of endpoints is permitted for devices providing two connection ports andsupporting dual pathway segment connections. The description of endpoint devices is notintended to exclude devices that support dual pathway connections. Since these pathwaysare servicing a single device only a single Primary Pathway connection is required. Thesecond pathway connection exceeds minimum equipment standards and is therefore notrequired to be verified as a Redundant Pathway Segment; it can be considered connected to aNon-Designated Pathway Segment (see Figure A.12.3.6 (1)(c)).



A_12_3_6-1-a.tif Figure A.12.3.6 (1) (a) ✓

A_12_3_6-1-b.tif figure A.12.3.6 (1)(b) ✓

A_12_3_6-1-c.tif figure A.12.3.6 (1)(c) ✓


Questions concerning the acceptability of using Ethernet and other non-fire or non-MNS networks for fire alarm and signaling systems applications are being raised more and more. Because of these questions and the rapidly changing technology, the Task Group on Networks in FA/ECS was formed by the Correlating Committee to address the risk analysis, design, application, installation, and performance of networks and networking equipment used in fire alarm systems, fire EVACS and mass notification systems. This proposal and Annex material is a result of that effort.Some of the concerns that were raised during related discussions for the 2013 edition included: ground detection, system management, availability, and software control. These issues were discussed and the results are provided in the Task Group’s proposal.The task group reviewed the new Shared Pathway Designations added to Chapter 12 in 2013. The proposal addresses the type of network acceptable, reliability required, listings required and use of the network to connect devices or appliances or interfaced systems. The proposal is the recommendation by a unanimous vote of the Correlating Committee Task Group



members that was comprised of TC members from Chapters 10, 14, 23, 24 and 26 as well as individuals outside of the committees.Wayne MooreA.J. CapowskiJoe L. CollinsDan HoronVic HummMichael PallettCharles PughRobert SchifilitiAviv SiegelLarry ShudakBob ElliottPaul CrowleyJeff SilveiraJeff KnightAndrew Berezowski





















Class N Annex MaterialA.12.3.6 (4) The operational conditions of the pathway include factors such asLatency, Throughput, Response Time, Arrival Rate, Utilization, Bandwidth, and Loss. It is intended that the Life Safety equipment connected to a Class N network activelymonitor some or all of the pathway’s operational conditions, so that an improperlyinstalled or configured pathway, or a subsequently degraded pathway, or network ofpathway segments, is detected by the life safety equipment and reported as aTrouble. This monitoring is intended to be continuous such that a degradation ofpathway performance over time is detected and reported. Trouble would bereported when operational conditions of the pathway(s) have deteriorated to thepoint where the equipment is no longer capable of meeting its minimum requiredperformance requirements, even if some level of communication to endpoint devicesis still maintained. Examples of performance requirements include the activation ofan alarm within 10 seconds, the reporting of a trouble signal within 200 seconds,synchronization of strobes, and delivering audio messages with requiredintelligibility.

It is worth noting, that it is possible to have a pathway, where end to endcommunications is operational under system idle conditions, but in the event of analarm, the increased load on a degraded pathway could cause a partial or completefailure to deliver the required Life Safety signals. This is the situation intended to beactively detected and reported.


Questions concerning the acceptability of using Ethernet and other non-fire or non-MNS networks for fire alarm and signaling systems applications are being raised more and more. Because of these questions and the rapidly changing technology, the Task Group on Networks in FA/ECS was formed by the Correlating Committee to address the risk analysis, design, application, installation, and performance of networks and networking equipment used in fire alarm systems, fire EVACS and mass notification systems. This proposal and Annex material is a result of that effort.Some of the concerns that were raised during related discussions for the 2013 edition included: ground detection, system management, availability, and software control. These issues were discussed and the results are provided in the Task Group’s proposal.The task group reviewed the new Shared Pathway Designations added to Chapter 12 in 2013. The proposal addresses the type of network acceptable, reliability required, listings required and use of the network to connect devices or appliances or interfaced systems. The proposal is the recommendation by a unanimous vote of the Correlating Committee Task Group members that was comprised of TC members from Chapters 10, 14, 23, 24 and 26 as well as individuals outside of the committees.Wayne MooreA.J. CapowskiJoe L. CollinsDan HoronVic HummMichael PallettCharles PughRobert Schifiliti



Aviv SiegelLarry ShudakBob ElliottPaul CrowleyJeff SilveiraJeff KnightAndrew Berezowski





















A.12.3.6 (5) Devices with dual path connections are permitted to be connected so asto create a daisy chain of devices on a ring. In this circumstance they cannot beconsidered endpoint devices because each pathway segment supports multipledevices; therefore verified Redundant Pathway Segments would be necessary. Thiscan be accomplished with a ring topology, as long as each segment of the ring isverified as functional, and the failure of any one segment does not result in the lossof functionality of more than one device. In this circumstance the requirements forClass N are satisfied by allowing the Primary and Redundant Pathway Segments toshare the same media by providing two possible directions of communications on aring topology (see Figure A.12.3.6 (5)). This configuration is fully compliant with12.3.6. (5).

The daisy chain configuration is also a permissible connection method for multiplecontrol units that require verified Primary and Redundant Pathway Segments.



A_12_3_6-5.tif figure A.12.3.6 (5) ✓


Questions concerning the acceptability of using Ethernet and other non-fire or non-MNS networks for fire alarm and signaling systems applications are being raised more and more. Because of these questions and the rapidly changing technology, the Task Group on Networks in FA/ECS was formed by the Correlating Committee to address the risk analysis, design, application, installation, and performance of networks and networking equipment used in fire alarm systems, fire EVACS and mass notification systems. This proposal and Annex material is a result of that effort.Some of the concerns that were raised during related discussions for the 2013 edition included: ground detection, system management, availability, and software control. These issues were discussed and the results are provided in the Task Group’s proposal.The task group reviewed the new Shared Pathway Designations added to Chapter 12 in 2013. The proposal addresses the type of network acceptable, reliability required, listings required and use of the network to connect devices or appliances or interfaced systems. The proposal is the recommendation by a unanimous vote of the Correlating Committee Task Group members that was comprised of TC members from Chapters 10, 14, 23, 24 and 26 as well as individuals outside of the committees.Wayne MooreA.J. CapowskiJoe L. CollinsDan HoronVic HummMichael PallettCharles PughRobert SchifilitiAviv SiegelLarry ShudakBob Elliott



Paul CrowleyJeff SilveiraJeff KnightAndrew Berezowski





















A.12.4.2 Examples of pathway survivability level 1 could be:(1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable(2) 2-hour fire-rated cable system [electrical circuit protective system(s)](3) A fire resistance rated enclosure or protected area(4) Performance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction(5) Any interconnecting conductors, cables, or other physical pathways installed in metalraceways in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordancewith NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprink ler Systems.In a one hour fire resistance rated building, it isn’t necessary to construct a 2 hour fireresistance rated enclosure or develop an alternative approach to meet a 2 hour performance.A.12.4.3 Examples of pathway survivability level 2 could be:(1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable or 2-hour fire-rated cable system [electrical circuitprotective system(s)] in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system inaccordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of SprinklerSystems.(2) Installing any interconnecting conductors, cables, or other physical pathways installed inmetal raceways in a 2-hour fire-rated enclosure and protected area in buildings that are fullyprotected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for theInstallation of Sprinkler Systems.(3) Performance alternatives that provide redundant protection as approved by the authorityhaving jurisdiction



Pathway_Levels_je_121.4.pdf Cover Sheet ✓


When this committee developed pathway survivability levels, it was not meant to be hierarchical. For proof (or a reminder), see page 72-290 in the 2009 ROC in response to Comment 72-514, log 382.However, because of the numbering scheme used (levels 0 through 4) and an incorrect perception to a number of code users that all the 2 hr options in pathway level 2 are superior to the sprinkler option provided in pathway level 1, some chapters are excluding the latter as an equivalent option.The requirement for pathway levels are borne out of the section pertaining to circuits surviving an attack by fire which was previously contained in Chapter 6 of the 2007 edition of NFPA 72. In that edition, the four current pathway level 2 options and the pathway level 1 sprinkler option were all deemed equivalent.From the 2007 edition of NFPA 72:6.9.10.4.3 Where the separation of emergency voice/alarm control equipment locations results in the portions of the systemcontrolled by one location being dependent upon the control equipment in other locations, the circuits between the dependent controls shall be protected against attack by fire using one of the following methods:(1) A 2-hour fire rated circuit integrity (CI) cable(2) A 2-hour fire rated cable system (electrical circuit protective system)(3) Routing the cable through a 2-hour rated enclosure(4) Performance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction



(5) Buildings fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, and with the interconnecting wiring or cables between the emergency voice/alarm communication control equipment locations installed inmetal raceways and in accordance Article 760 of NFPA 70The code needs to remove the hierarchical implication between pathway levels 1 and 2 once and for all by combining the two pathway levels. But it needs to go further and stop listing specific methods for meeting pathway survivability requirements and instead, use performance based language. If examples are needed, place them in the annex as I’ve proposed.Note: this public input is independent of the public input I submitted as part of a SIG-PRO task group. It’s different as it proposed to move all examples to the annex. Though I think this public input is viable on its own, I have no issue with the SIG-PRO task group’s PI should that be preferred by the TC.


















A.12.4.3 (4) A performance based alternative is needed because it is possible to construct anon-sprinklered, Type V(000) building that employs relocation or partial evacuation (e.g., asingle story ambulatory health care occupancy) that wouldn’t warrant either a 2 hour fireresistance rated enclosure or 2 hour cableA.12.4.4 (4) A performance based alternative is needed because it is possible to construct asprinklered single story Type V(111) or multi-story Type II(111) building that employs relocationor partial evacuation (e.g., a health care occupancy) that wouldn’t warrant either a 2 hour fireresistance rated enclosure or 2 hour cable (i.e., a 1 hr enclosure would suffice)



Pathway_Levels_TG_12.4.pdf Cover Sheet ✓




















FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

Log #:

Date Rec’d:

Date 5/15/22013 Name Joshua W. Elvove (on behalf of SIG-PRO TG) Tel. No.

Company NA Email

Street Address City State Zip







Revise Section 12.4 as follows 12.4 Pathway Survivability. All pathways shall comply with the NFPA 70, National Electrical Code. 12.4.1 Pathway Survivability Level 0. Level 0 pathways shall not be required to have any provisions for pathway survivability. 12.4.2 Not used Pathway Survivability Level 1. Pathway survivability Level 1 shall consist of pathways in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, with any interconnecting conductors, cables, or other physical pathways installed in metal raceways. 12.4.3 Pathway Survivability Level 2. Pathway survivability Level 2 shall consist of one or more of the following: (1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable (2) 2-hour fire-rated cable system [electrical circuit protective system(s)] (3) 2-hour fire-rated enclosure or protected area (4)* 2-hour pPerformance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction (5) Any interconnecting conductors, cables, or other physical pathways installed in metal raceways in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems 12.4.4 Pathway Survivability Level 3. Pathway survivability Level 3 shall consist of in buildings that are fully protected by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, and one or more of the following: (1) 2-hour fire-rated circuit integrity (CI) cable (2) 2-hour fire-rated cable system [electrical circuit protective system(s)] (3) 2-hour fire-rated enclosure or protected area (4)* 2-hour pPerformance alternatives approved by the authority having jurisdiction Add the following new annex material: A.12.4.3(4) A performance based alternative is needed because it is possible to construct a non-sprinklered, Type V(000) building that employs relocation or partial evacuation (e.g., a single story ambulatory health care occupancy) that wouldn’t warrant either a 2 hour fire resistance rated enclosure or 2 hour cable A.12.4.4(4) A performance based alternative is needed because it is possible to construct a sprinklered single story Type V(111) or multi-story Type II(111) building that employs relocation or partial evacuation (e.g., a health care occupancy) that wouldn’t warrant either a 2 hour fire resistance rated enclosure or 2 hour cable (i.e., a 1 hr enclosure would suffice)












5/15/2013





A12.7 Nomenclature

Type your content here ...

A.12.7 The nomenclature described in this paragraph may be found on drawings,specifications, and/or the actual installed circuits. Some examples of the nomenclature wouldbe: X.2.3, A, B.3.



The purpose of this public input is to clean up the wording of 12.7 and add an Annex paragraph


















A.21.2.4

Emergency control function interface devices can be located far from the device to beactivated, such as air-handling units and exhaust fans located on the roof. Therequirement for monitoring installation wiring for integrity only applies to the wiringbetween the fire alarm control unit and the emergency control function interface device.For example, it does not apply to the wiring between the emergency control functioninterface device and a motor stop/start control relay, or between the emergency controlfunction interface device and the equipment to be controlled (e.g., air-handling units andexhaust fans). The location of the emergency control function interface device within 3 ft(0.9 m) applies to the point of interface and not to remotely located equipment.

Figure Y shows one arrangement for a fire alarm system or other signaling system tocontrol an emergency function using an emergency control function interface device.The figure shows an elevator controller monitoring contacts controlled by a fire alarm orsignaling system. Those contacts may be integral to the control unit, part of anelectrically controlled relay or part of an addressable control module relay. Twoindividual systems, such as a fire alarm system and an elevator controller might alsointerface using a special module that allows direct data communications between thetwo systems.

[INSERT FIGURE Y FROM FILE Emergency Control Function Interface.png ]



Emergency_Control_Function_Interface.pngNew figure as part of new text added to A.21.2.4

✓


New text and figure added to existing A.21.2.4 show the interface between a fire alarm or signaling system and some other individual system. Figure graphically shows the delineation of NFPA 72 and standards that might cover the other individual system.















A.21.3.7

This requirement applies to smoke and heat detectors installed in the hoistway. It isimportant to note that the hoistway includes the pit. The location of smoke or heatdetectors will, most likely, require special consideration in order to provide the intendedresponse of early detection of fire in the elevator pit. The location of these detectors willlikely need to be below the lowest level of recall in order to provide an adequateresponse. Since there is no real ceiling at this location to allow installation using thespacing provisions of Chapter 17 , the provisions of 17.7.3.1.3 and 17.4.10 shouldbe considered, which allows detectors to be placed closer to the hazard in a positionwhere the detector can intercept the smoke or heat. Also refer to A.21.3.14.2(3) . AnyFire Alarm Initiating Device (FAID) installed in the elevator hoistway and is used toinitiate elevator phase 1 emergency recall should be accessible from outside thehoistway for service, testing, repair or maintenace, to prevent fire alarm installationand/or service personnel from being required to perform their work inside the elevatorhoistway.


Problem: FAIDs installed inside elevator hoistways are required to be serviced, tested and repaired by FA system personnel, whom should not be required to perform their work inside elevator hoistways. Solution: Clarify that required hoistway's FAIDs must be accessible from outside the hoistway





















A.21.3.9

The objective of Phase I Emergency Recall Operation is to have the elevatorautomatically return to the recall level before fire can affect the safe operation of theelevator. This includes both the safe mechanical operation of the elevator, as well asthe delivery of passengers to a safe lobby location. Where ANSI/ASME A17.1/CSAB44, Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators, specifies the use of smoke detectors,these devices are expected to provide the earliest response to situations that wouldrequire Phase I Emergency Recall Operations. The use of other automatic fire detectionis only intended where smoke detection would not be appropriate due to theenvironment. Where ambient conditions prohibit the installation of smoke detectors, theselection and location of other automatic fire detection should be evaluated to ensurethe best response is achieved. When heat detectors are used, consideration should begiven to both detector temperature and time lag characteristics. The consideration of alow temperature rating alone might not provide the earliest response. See 21.4.1 andA.21.4.1. A combination rate-of-rise/fixed temperature heat detector should beconsidered where the sensitivities of the sprinkler head and a fixed temperaturedetector ae comparable.



20130516152208.pdf Cover Sheet ✓


First additional sentence: The listed spacing rating of the elevator recall heat detector should be no less than that of the elevator power shutdown heat detector. The elevator recall function will most likely never work if the sprinkler head goes off first.Second addition sentence: Where a rate-of-rise element could be added to a fixed temperature heat detector without causing false alarms, this would help ensure the desired response of the heat detector prior to the sprinkler head activation.



Organization:






the NFPA in w hich this Public Input in this or another similar or derivative form is used. Except to the extent that I may

lack authority to make an assignment of content identif ied above, I hereby w arrant that I am the author of this Public

Input and that I have full pow er and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.





A.21.3.14

It is recommended that the installation be in accordance with Figure A.21.3.14(a) andFigure A.21.3.14(b) . Figure A.21.3.14(a) should be used where the elevator isinstalled at the same time as the building fire alarm system. Figure A.21.3.14(b)should be used where the elevator is installed after the building fire alarm system.

Figure A.21.3.14(a) Elevator Zone — Elevator and Fire Alarm System Installedat Same Time.

Figure A.21.3.14(b) Elevator Zone — Elevator Installed After Fire AlarmSystem.

Fire Alarm Initiating Devices used to initiate Elevator Phase 1 Emergency Recall,should comply with the Elevator Code ASME A17.1. New or upgraded fire alarm systems installed in existing buildings having existing elevators, should not change ormodify any of the existing elevator/s functionality regarding fire service operation. Someof the existing elevators do not have any recall capabilities at all, and some have limitedcapabilities such as designated level recall only, while newer elevators have both



designated level and alternate level recall capabilities. Only when a new elevator isbeing installed or when existing elevator is being modernized, such as elevatorcontroller replacemnt, etc. , the fire alarm system should be modified accordingly inaccordance with the specific requirments of the elevator code ASME A17.1 and otherbuilding and fire codes and standards such as NFPA 13.


Problem:This annex section and associated diagram is confusing and not clear and does not address the main issue of interfacing fire alarm system with elevator controls.

Solution:Delete the existing section and diagram and clarify that only an Elevator project (new elevator or elevator modernization project) triggers fire alarm system modification per the specific elevator code requirements but not vise versa. A new fire alarm system installation or upgrade project, does not generate elevator function/s upgrade.





















A.21.3.14

It is recommended that the installation be in accordance with Figure A.21.3.14(a) andFigure A.21.3.14(b). Figure A.21.3.14(a) should be used where the elevator is installedat the same time as the building fire alarm system. Figure A.21.3.14(b) should be usedwhere the elevator is installed after the building fire alarm system. These two figures arebased on analog devices. Installations with addressable devices may need to considerdifferent design installation approaches based on field conditions.





20130510111014.pdf Cover Sheet with Supporting material ✓


The two Annex figures for this section apparently reflect back to the 1987 edition of NFPA 72. Please



refer also to 21.3.4. Addressable designs often use addressable relays within 3 ft of the elevator

controller. The reliability criteria of elevator recall hasn't changed since the 1987 edition. When people are using the code Annex figures, they should be aware of the first new sentence proposed above. The second sentence is offered for consideration of the code panel. Please note the submitted NFPA Technical Question and Response for reference. Note: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters.



Organization:






the NFPA in w hich this Public Input in this or another similar or derivative form is used. Except to the extent that I may

lack authority to make an assignment of content identif ied above, I hereby w arrant that I am the author of this Public

Input and that I have full pow er and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.





Origin (from sources other than the submitter)

NFPA Technical Questions Response of March 15, 2013 - (ref:+00D5077Vx._50050Kpvbn:ref)




A.21.3.14

It is recommended that the installation be in accordance with Figure A.21.3.14(a) andFigure A.21.3.14(b) . Figure A.21.3.14(a) should be used where the elevator isinstalled at the same time as the building fire alarm system. Figure A.21.3.14(b)should be used where the elevator is installed after the building fire alarm system.




The existing annex material does not represent current design practices and is confusing to users of the code. The current diagrams were introduced to the code in the 1987 edition.




Submitter Full Name:Kurt Ruchala

Organization: FIREPRO Incorporated

Affilliation: SIG-PRO Controls Task Group



I, Kurt Ruchala, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Kurt Ruchala, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright







A.21.4.2

Upon activation of the heat detector used for elevator power shutdown, there can be adelay in the activation of the power shunt trip. When such a delay is used, it isrecommended that the delay should be approximately the time that it takes the elevatorcar to travel from the top of the hoistway to the lowest recall level. The purpose of thedelay of the shunt trip is to increase the potential for elevators to complete their travelto the recall level. It is important to be aware that the requirements of A17.1/B44,Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators , relative to sprinkler water release and powershutdown would still apply.


Problem:The intent of this delay is not clear:1) Is the intent of this delay to prevent building occupants from getting trapped in the elevator upon shunt trip during Phase 1 emergency recall? 2) Or is the intent of this delay is to prevent firefighters from getting trapped in the elevator, upon shunt trip under Phase 2 emergency operation?

If the intent is to protect occupants under Phase 1 emergency recall - It is very unlikely that the elevator will not complete Phase 1 recall upon the machine room/hoistway smoke detector activation ( for example, a 500 feet tall high-rise building has about 60-70 seconds time for the elevator to recall from top to bottom, which is the most extreme scenario, based on research, the typical time between a smoke detector activation and a heat detector activation in elevator machine rooms is about 110 seconds which even in this extreme scenario exceeds the longest travel time of the elevator) - The conclusion from that is that in almost all cases Phase 1 recall will be completed upon the smoke detector activation before the heat detector activation - and therefore an extra delay time is not required.

If the intent is to protect firefighters in phase 2 from getting trapped inside the elevator upon shunt trip, this delay will not help them at all. Since firefighters in phase 2 have a complete manual control of the elevator they will not be aware that a delay has started. They me be aware if the machine room/hoistway smoke detector has activated and generated Phase 1 recall, but in most cases they will not be aware that the heat detector has activated and started a delay which will result in a shunt trip.

In order to achieve this delay without taking inputs from the elevator controller (which is against the elevator code), it is required to have a built-in timer within the FACU (max time it takes the elevator to travel from top to bottom) - However, the sprinkler may activate before this time end which is in violation of the elevator code (shunt power prior or upon sprinkler activation) since the elevator may be held on a floor, etc. Another option is to provide a pre-action system for the machine room/hoistway sprinkler (s) - Upon heat detector activation the solenoid will release the pre-action valve and water will fill the pipe to the sprinkler and upon sprinkler activation the waterflow switch will shunt the power. (or similar method)

SolutionThis delay should be removed from NFPA 72 annex since it creates conflict with elevator code ASME A17.1, the only possible compliance with the elevator code is very costly (pre-action system). Also,



the intent of the current building and fire code is to remove the shunt trip function from almost all Traction type elevators to prevent the risk of firefighters getting trapped inside the elevator when they are under Phase 2 emergency operation.The only current code requirements for shunt trip will be based on NFPA 13 requirements for sprinklers in machine rooms and hoistways which are currently required only for hydraulic elevators and freight elevators. Since these elevators do not create a significant risk to firefighters in phase 2 emergency operation (hydraulic elevator are limited in rise and firefighter do not typically use them and freight elevators typically have alternative passenger elevators to be used by firefighters) - Therefore, since there is no significant risk for firefighters, there should not be a significant cost (pre-action system) to protect against a risk which is very unlikely.


















A.21.7.2

See A.21.7.3 .

This standard does not specifically require detection devices used to cause theoperation of HVAC system smoke dampers, fire dampers, fan control, smoke doors orfire doors to be connected to the fire alarm system.


Based on our TC task group conclusions, the existing appendix content (just a reference to the next section) would be clearer by moving the content from A.21.7.3 to A.21.7.2 and deleting A.21.7.3


















A.21.7.3

This standard does not specifically require detection devices used to cause theoperation of HVAC system smoke dampers, fire dampers, fan control, smoke doors,and fire doors to be connected to the fire alarm system.


Based on our TC task group conclusions, this appendix content would be clearer by moving it to A.21.7.2 and deleting A.21.7.3 (see also PI-374)















6/5/13 TerraView™


Public Input No. 28-NFPA 72-2013 [ New Section after A.23.4.2.2 ]

See the uploaded file.



72_PI28_Rec_from_TIA.pdf Rec text from TIA ✓


Note: This Proposal originates from Tentative Interim Amendment 72-13-4 (TIA 1053) issued by the Standards Council on August 9, 2012.

Changes made during the normal revision process for the 2013 edition of NFPA 72 have resulted in a correlation issue that needs to be resolved. The proposed change is being made to provide correlation and consistency with the other changes made in Chapter 23. Revisions have been made through the committee action on Proposal 72-166 that included the deletion of 23.6.5. While some of the material in 23.6 was relocated to Chapter 12 as a part of the committee action, the specific provisions of 23.6.5 were not. The associated annex material for 26.6 relates to the requirements in 23.6.5. This related annex material was inadvertently overlooked in the revision process and needs to be deleted.

Emergency Nature: The change proposed by this TIA intends to resolve an inconsistency that would otherwise occur in the 2013 edition of NFPA 72 due changes made during the normal revision cycle. It is intended that this proposed TIA be processed concurrently with the processing of the 2013 edition of NFPA 72.


Submitter Full Name:Merton Bunker

Organization: US Department of State

Submittal Date: Fri Jan 25 13:48:09 EST 2013


I, Merton Bunker, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Merton Bunker, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright




Report on Proposals – June 2015 NFPA 72_______________________________________________________________________________________________72- Log #14 SIG-PRO

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Merton W. Bunker, Jr., US Department of State

Subsection 23.6.5 requires a trouble indication on the loss of data communications for all styles. Loss of datacommunications means that a device or subsystem connected to the signaling line circuit is unable to send or receiveinformation to another device or subsystem connected to the same signaling line circuit. In practical operation thismeans that a device or subsystem cannot be removed from the signaling line circuit or made completely inoperablewithout a trouble indication at the system.

Changes made during the normal revision process for the 2013 edition of NFPA 72 have resulted in acorrelation issue that needs to be resolved.The proposed change is being made to provide correlation and consistency with the other changes made in Chapter

23. Revisions have been made through the committee action on Proposal 72-166 that included the deletion of 23.6.5.While some of the material in 23.6 was relocated to Chapter 12 as a part of the committee action, the specific provisionsof 23.6.5 were not. The associated annex material for 26.6 relates to the requirements in 23.6.5. This related annexmaterial was inadvertently overlooked in the revision process and needs to be deleted.

The change proposed by this TIA intends to resolve an inconsistency that would otherwise occur inthe 2013 edition of NFPA 72 due changes made during the normal revision cycle. It is intended that this proposed TIAbe processed concurrently with the processing of the 2013 edition of NFPA 72.

1Printed on 1/25/2013




A.23.6.1

The intent is to clarify that this requirement applies only to SLCs that connect toaddressable devices and not to SLCs that interconnect fire alarm control units (FACU).

Fire incidents have occurred where substantial losses were incurred due to the shortingand failure of an SLC damaged by fire prior to the activation of an alarm. In addition SLCshorts caused inadvertently as part of building operations, and activities can cause acatastrophic failure of the fire and life system to operate if a fire occurs subsequently tothe occurrence of a fault that had not been corrected. A single short on an SLC of anNFPA 72 2013 fully code compliant system not only can disable the capability of thesystem to activate an alarm. But, in addition, the alarm notification appliances andcritical life safety emergency control functions including atrium smoke control, stairwellpressurization, door unlocking, and HVAC shutdown can all be disabled as well. Insome configurations, even off-premises alarm, trouble, and supervisory reportingfunctions can be disabled.

When an SLC is shorted, the results can be catastrophic in terms of loss of lives andproperty if a fire occurs.



The purpose of this public input is to clean up an issue with the 2013 code. This Annex paragraph refers to a section that no longer exists – and does not refer to Section 23.6.1.


















A.23.6.1

The intent of this code section is to

clarify that this requirement applies only to SLCs that connect to addressable devicesand not to SLCs that interconnect fire alarm control units (FACU).

Fire incidents have occurred where substantial losses were incurred due to the shortingand failure of an SLC damaged by fire prior to the activation of an alarm. In addition SLCshorts caused inadvertently as part of building operations, and activities can cause acatastrophic failure of the fire and life system to operate if a fire occurs subsequently tothe occurrence of a fault that had not been corrected. A single short on an SLC of anNFPA 72 2013 fully code compliant system not only can disable the capability of thesystem to activate an alarm. But, in addition, the alarm notification appliances andcritical life safety emergency control functions including atrium smoke control, stairwellpressurization, door unlocking, and HVAC shutdown can all be disabled as well. Insome configurations, even off-premises alarm, trouble, and supervisory reportingfunctions can be disabled.

When an SLC is shorted, the results can be catastrophic in terms of loss of lives andproperty if a fire occurs.

apply to both short circuit faults and open circuit faults.

Fire alarm and signaling system communications technologies have evolved to the pointthat SLCs are now the prevalent means of monitoring initiation devices, controllingoutput devices and communicating between panels, annunicators and controllers.

The extent of coverage of traditional IDCs are inherently limited based on the quantity ofpowered initiation devices or code limitations. Similarly the extent and coverage ofNACs is also inherently limited by the power required to operate the devices. SLCsunlike IDCs and NACs have few limitations and it is now common that a single SLC canmonitor and control over 250 devices. In addition a single SLC can be the only pathwayby which alarms are initiated, emergency control functions are controlled and audibleand visual notification appliances are activated.

A total catastrophic failure of a fire alarm and life safety system due to a single open orshort on an SLC can negate most if not all of this code’s requirements of specifying anacceptable minimum level of performance and reliability for the protection of life andproperty from fire.

Designers should carefully consider the potential that a single SLC short or opencaused by a fire or inadvertent damage to the SLC could disable an entire SLC prior tothe activation of an alarm condition along with the subsequent alarm signaling andemergency control functions.

With traditional IDCs and NACs a single open, ground or short fault on 1 circuit couldnot affect the performance of other IDCs, NACs and emergency control circuits. Assuch the occurrence of a single short or open limited the extent of the failure to aparticular zone or area.

One of the methods of providing for an acceptable level of performance and reliability ofSLCs is to limit the potential catastrophic failure to a zone similar to that which hasbeen and is currently required for traditional IDCs and NACs.

A single zone could be thought of in terms of, but not limited to, the following:



Zone by floor, where an SLC would not span multiple floors

Zone by floor area, where a large floor would split into multiple zones based on amaximum floor area size (e.g. 22,500ft2 in area)

Zone by fire barrier or smoke barrier compartment boundaries, where an SLCwould not cross a fire or smoke barrier compartment boundary

Zone by maximum length or circuit, where an SLC would not be longer than apredetermined length (e.g., 300 ft)

See definition of Zone (3.3.320) for additional clarification.





















A.23.6.3

Possible scenarios where a designer might choose to permit loss of more than one zone,might include a multi-story building with a small floor plan footprint where a limited number ofaddressable devices are located on the floor, e.g., one manual fire alarm box and twoautomatic fire detection devices on the floor. In this scenario, the designer might choose toinclude multiple floors of devices on the same signaling line circuit, because the loss of suchdevices due to a single SLC short or open would disable a limited number of devices.

Another scenario could include buildings with a small vestibule at the top of an exit stair thatleads out onto the roof of a building. The vestibule might contain one manual fire alarm boxand one or two automatic fire detection devices that could be connected to the signaling linecircuit on the floor below and considered the same zone.

Designers providing documents for upgrades to an existing building where the control units andall fire alarm system devices are being replaced but some portion of the existing circuits arebeing re-used, might opt for combining zones and the associated risk with the loss of thosedevices due to a single SLC short or open because of constructability reasons. The intent ofthis section is not to impose an unnecessary burden on building owners with existing systemsundergoing renovations, upgrades, or replacements.

In all example scenarios identified above, and those not contained herein, the designer isrequired to provide a documented performance-based design approach to justify why the lossof more than one zone is acceptable. Documentation must meet the items identified inSection 23.6.3 and submitted in accordance with Section 7.3.7.


This is the work of the SIG-PRO Committee Task Group assigned to review this section and provide updated language for consideration. Members of the Task Group include L. Belliveau, L. Shudak, D. Struck and C. Willms. This follows Public Input 358.



















A.23.6.5

The intent is to clarify that the requirement identified in 23.6.1 applies only to SLCs thatconnect to addressable devices and not to SLCs that interconnect fire alarm control units(FACU) or transponders.


This is the work of the SIG-PRO Committee Task Group assigned to review this section and provide updated language for consideration. Members of the Task Group include L. Belliveau, L. Shudak, D. Struck and C. Willms. This follows Public Input 361.
















6/5/13 TerraView™



A.23.8.3 This requirement is meant to describe performance of the circuit rather than to specifythe types of fault conditions that could cause loss of a portion of the communication circuit. Class A and X pathways incorporate redundant pathways, but must report a fault conditionwhen one exists on a damaged portion of the pathway. Traditionally, short circuits and opencircuits are the typical causes of faults on the circuit, but modern equipment is capable ofevaluating degraded pathways that are not due to an electrically a short or open. A faultcondition encompasses anything that prevents the operation of that pathway.


NOTE: This proposal appeared as Comment 72-278 (Log #225) which was held from the A12 ROC on Proposal 72-292. This proposal should have been accept in principle. It brings up a need to uniquely identify the circuits between two control units. Generally, most people perceive that the SLC only exists between a control unit and the devices (i.e. IDCs, smoke detectors, contact monitors, emergency control function interface device, etc.). This traditional definition has been expanded to describe control unit to control unit communication. Therefore, it is imperative to create a control unit to control unit circuit definition to accommodate for this connection in terms of performance rather than a specific technology as originally proposed. The type of information and usage of circuits from loop devices to control unit is considerably different than between control units. The inclusion and subsequent definition of this new circuit should also replace the “communication link” that the SIG-ECS committee was forced to create since there was no applicable circuit type to describe the pathway to an MNS in 24.4.3.4.11. Additionally, several proposals in this cycle propose different restrictions for particular circuit types (see 72-55, 72-293, 72-294, etc.). Some of these include SLC restrictions and it was evident that the proposal was not meant to include circuits between control units, further showing the need for a new circuit designation. This requested change allows for a comprehensive performance based circuit to support modern communication technologies and not on electrical diagnostics.


Submitter Full Name:Doug Woosley

Organization: Valcom, Inc.

Submittal Date: Fri Dec 14 10:21:05 EST 2012


I, Doug Woosley, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full





By checking this box I aff irm that I am Doug Woosley, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright


