Question:
Ken,
I have a question that somewhat relates to this topic, and I have not been
able to get a clear answer from anyone. First a little background, I am a
certified Fire Official, I have been in the fire service for the past 14
years. This is in regard to installing smoke detectors in a non required
system......i.e. a mom and pop store that is not required to have a "fire
alarm system" but the client wants the burglar alarm company to install some
smoke detectors, and connect them to the B/A system.
In my humble opinion, the way I read the code, is that if a fire alarm system
is not required, then this is permissible. It would be as if the store owner
went out and bought battery operated smokes at home depot and had them put
up. However, by connecting them to the B/A system we are establishing a
central station link to get the fire department there quicker. (keep in mind
by the code the store owner does not "have" to do anything)
However, some believe that a smoke detector device consists of a system. If
this is true then by code this "system" has to be installed to code. Thus you
cannot connect it to a B/A system unless it is UL rated for fire detection,
has to be certain wiring, upgraded sirens......etc. I guess it comes down to
the definition of a system. In the example above, it is my opinion that this
is a burglar alarm system with some smoke detectors attached to it. It is not
a fire system does to the fact that the panel is not rated for that use. Just
like on the other hand if a fire system was required a regular burglar alarm
panel would not meet codes.
Thus, I would like to find out legally, when devices make up a system. As I
said before it is of my opinion that a system depends on the panel that those
devices are connected to, and what that panel is rated for. If that panel is
a fire alarm panel, then the entire system must be installed to code. If that
panel is a burglar alarm panel then there would be no problem adding some
smoke detectors to that panel. Thanking you in advance for your input.
Tom
Answer:
The answer might depend on where you are located. In NY I do not believe you
can use any fire without complying with NYCFD requirements. Either the
system complies or it does not; there is no specs for a non required fire
alarm system. When the fire is reported that system will not have a fire
alarm permit. Who gets the fines will depend on the jurisdiction. As far as
liability you will need to make it very clear in your contract that your
customer does not what a fire alarm system; adding any fire protection to a
non compliant system may lead your subscriber into thinking it has protection
that it does not have, thus subjecting you to liability (that's separate and
apart from any criminal or civil fine exposure). Maybe I will circulate your
email and get some comments. Ken
****************
Here are additional comments on the issue:
Ken,
I am an alarm dealer of 21 years as well as a security consultant. Bottom
line, it depends on where you live and which fire official you have to
contend with!
Common logic would tell anyone that to add a smoke detector to a fire/burg
system does enhance the level of security. But, in doing so in many
locations, you place it under the 'authority' of someone who then wants you
to meet a code that would not exist if the unit had not been added. We face
it often.
This position of power & control by the fire authority often lowers the level
of detection (protection) available to the system, simply because the
customer & dealer decide to omit the smoke detector.
Tom
******************
Ken, In the State of Lousiana if a licenced burg and fire company wants to
install system smoke detectors in a non-required occupancy an exemption
request must be submitted to the state fire marshals office for approval,
included information would be a burg control panel listed for commercial fire
and smoke detectors listed for the same panel
Jeff
********************
NFPA codes require that fire alarm equipment be listed (by UL, FM, etc.) for
the purpose. Most alarm panels which are UL-listed for residential burglar
alarms use are also UL-listed for residential (but not commercial) fire
alarms use. Few burglar alarm panels in businesses are listed for commercial
burglar alarm use because generally there is no law requiring it. Also very
few burglar alarm panels, even though listed for commercial burglar alarms,
are listed for commercial fire alarms. Under NFPA code, there are two
schools of opinion regarding installing a fire alarm system (primarily NFPA
72) that is not required for the occupancy (primarily NFPA 101). One opinion
is that if it is not required then the installation is not regulated. The
other opinion is that if it is installed at all then it must be installed
according to code. I personally will not install a fire alarm system, even
if it is not required, except to code, even if not enforced. As an attorney
you should know more than I about potential liability of someone who installs
a substandard system and a death results. Different jurisdictions apply
different codes. Alabama, for example, has adopted the International Fire
Code as well as NFPA, whichever is more stringent. I believe the
International Fire Code specifically says that any installation must meet
code even though the installation was not required by code. You did not
provide the inquirer's jurisdiction.
Ed
**************************
hey Ken
I just wanted to give you my experience on the above since we as a Fire &
Security Company have done a number of Fire Alarm System in the NJ and PA
area and deal with construction officials as well as fire sub-code officials.
Assuming we are talking about installing a system by the book........No one
will ever get a noncompliant Fire Alarm System Approved by any AHJ.....no
matter where it is installed.....it must follow industry standards as well as
any and all codes according to the state your in.........Most will use BOCA
and/or NFPA as a guide
Yes, I have seen some really strange installations that may not even be
legally approved by an AHJ........... we as a company would never accept
those systems with things as.........improper wire, lack of audible devices,
lack of detection devices, improper placement, etc........in any
event......yes they try and install a FA System really cheap which takes away
from the reputable Alarm Companies that would not take all the shortcuts that
are done out there ....probably illegal systems to begin with
but the biggest concern is that when you install a system you have just
accepted a HUGE responsibility and liability
if someone gets hurt, killed or is a major loss of property......no doubt one
thing that will be looked into is the entire alarm system.....then the spot
light is on the person and/or company that installed it.....no matter if it
was done right or wrong
that is something that always comes up
So my advice is......don't even entertain the thought of a FA System unless
you intend to do it right no matter what the customer says......they are not
the professionals....Alarm Companies are.....
Its not worth the risk or headache......
and one other point is that yes it should be UL for Fire so you could in fact
do both Fire and Security in one system......as long as its approved for such
use......which a lot of them out there are.....just depends on the
installation site
just my thoughts
JIM
**********************
Ken
Yes my understanding is:
1. If an owner installs fire detection in any area of a facility that
the system devices, controls, lay out, and installation must meet the minimal
code requirements applicable to protecting that area:
Example: A small retailer has purchased a BA system with monitoring and
the sales person advises the customer that for only $250 more he can have a
system smoke detector installed and his "fire alarm" monitored for only
$5.00/per mo. additional.
This kind of situation happens all the time throughout the US with
existing construction where tenants come and go. As a practical matter it is
a lot better than
nothing--and nothing would be the option for many cash short new business's.
BUT:
No where to my knowledge is this legal and both the owner and the provider
are at risk should something happen. The most likely "cost" will be borne by
the volunteer fire responder or paid department who will likely have to
respond to false alarms due to component aging, failure to clean detectors,
or detectors installed that do not consider environmental elements conducive
to such issues
Thanks
Keep up the good work
Ron
*************************
Ken,
NFPA72 requires that all fire alarm equipment must be rated for the
application. If you do a non-required system it must be installed as if it
were required. You can't hook smokes to a residentially rated control panel.
Mark
DEAR KEN ; I HAVE READ YOUR ANSWER TO TOM. HIS QUESTION IS ONE I ENCOUNTER IN
EVERY CLASS I HAVE EVER TAUGHT FOR BOTH THE N.B.F.A.A OR THE C.B.F.A.A. .
WHILE NOT A LAWYER I MAY BE ABLE TO ADD FUEL TO THE DISCUSSION .
LIFE SAFTY CODE 101 AND NATIONAL FIRE CODE 72 DO NOT PROVIDE INSTRUCTION
CONCERNING NON REQUIRED SYSTEMS. THEY SIMPLY DO NOT EXIST IN THE FIRE CODE
WORLD. HOWEVER.............
THE USE / APPLICATION OF FIRE DETECTION EQUIPMENT IS CLEARLY DEFINED WITHIN
THE MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUCH EQUIPMENT.THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE PART
OF THE CODE BY WAY OF THE EQUIPMENT LISTING. A MANUFACTURER IN RECEIVING U.L.
LISTING FOR A FIRE PRODUCT MUST SUBMIT CROSS LISTING OF WHAT EQUIPMENT THE
UNIT IS COMPATABLE WITH, AND THE PROPER PHYSICAL INSTALLATION OF THE THE
PRODUCT. THIS SAID..........
SHOULD A CLIENT WISH TO HAVE A SMOKE DETECTOR ADDED TO AN INTRUSION DETECTION
SYSTEM THE BALANCE OF SYSTEM COMPONENTS MUST BE SUCH THAT THEY WILL WORK FOR
THEIR INTENDED PURPOSE. IF THE INTENDED PURPOSE IS TO DETECT SMOKE THEN THE
DETECTOR MUST BE WIRED PER INSTRUCTIONS ,WHICH INCLUDE A LISTED CONTROL PANEL
, NOTIFICATION DEVICES AND STANDBY BATTERY. IF IT LOOKS LIKE A FIRE ALARM
,SMELLS LIKE A FIRE ALARM THEN IT MUST ACT LIKE A FIRE ALARM.
THE PUBLIC IS NOT LEARNED TO KNOW OUR INDUSTRY AND WOULD TRUST OUR
JUDGEMENT. IF I WERE TO ERROR .,. I WOULD WISH IT ON THE SIDE OF ECCESSIVE
PROFESSIONAL PERFORMANCE RATHER THEN PROFIT OR GREED BEING THE MOTIVING
FORCE.
JOHN YUSZA JR. MONITOR CONTROLS INC
****************************************
Hi Ken (and others):
I believe a "system" contains a central control panel. If it has one, it
is a system. On the other hand, it can be argued that anything that has any
connecting wires is a system, and I guess that would include battery powered
smokes that are interconnected to all sound when one is tripped. (Do they
still sell these?) In this case the only added component is the wire strung
between the two smokes. It should be fire wire, approved for such use and
properly installed. If 24guage phone wire is used and it burns through or
shorts, disabling the system, life and property are at great risk.
I believe that NFPA codes require that any additional or voluntary devices
must comply with all requirements as to approvals and installation methods. I
would interpret this to mean that if a system were fully voluntary, the same
codes apply.
Why would any firm want to install a substandard fire system? Any loss
would certainly bring the insurance company and their substandard equipment a
nd installation seekers. A loss of life due to delayed activation or a non
functioning system would be horrible. If a combination residential panel is
used at a "Mom & Pop" store, remember that you are already starting off on
the wrong foot with inappropriate residential equipment. A commercial
burglary panel that has the capacity to support one or two fire zones may be
okay as long as a separate output with approved notification appliances are
used, and modifications are made to bring communication, battery standby, and
system monitoring to within standards.
I certainly understand the pressures of pricing when a small customer
wants to have some fire protection without spending a fortune. Bear in mind
that they are probably looking for their insurance discount as the motivation
for a single smoke with central station. CYA dictates that although you would
like to help, you can not.
I think that as a rule, using a control panel makes it a system. I also
believe that having separate detection and notification devices also makes it
a system, as the "guts" could be contained within one of the devices.
Happy Holidays,
Mitch Cohen
************************************
Not to belabor the obvious, but the "approved for the intended use" part of
the issue can easily be solved by one of the many combination fire/burg
panels available.
Generally, the rules for required, municipally connected systems require full
compliance with applicable codes, but it would be an extremely shortsighted
LAHJ that would take an "all or nothing" position with a voluntary effort to
improve fire protection and life safety. Since no legal requirement, change
of occupancy, or renovations to the structure are indicated, and since the
indivudual raising the question appears to be an LAHJ, I would say that is it
completely within his/her authority to allow such an installation, so long as
no state or local law specifically prohibits it.
Mike Agri, Owner
Total Computing
****************************************
Ken, Have read this article/response with interest............Perhaps the
exampled situation of attaching an unrequired smoke detector to a burg-system
is similar to installing empty camera domes to thwart shop-lifting. ie.
While the camera housing may give the desired effect of scaring thieves, it
can also provide a form of false security.
The unfortunate downside to installing/connecting unrequired smoke
detectors or empty camera housings is that we live in a litigenous society
these days. That little bit of gained protection from these type actions
has the unfortunate downside of not providing complete, or perhaps expected
protection, thus producing potential liability issues.
Moving past any concern for lawsuits, the auxiliary switch supplied
as part of some smoke detectors is not required to be connected to anything.
These "utility" contacts are typically utilized for ancillary functions such
as illuminating a remote zone lamp on an annunciator, perhaps signaling a
remote sounder or other unregulated appliance or local system chosen or
approved by the owner of the smoke detector. Said switch is a "dry" contact,
meaning it does not supply power to any connected unit, nor monitor the
connected wiring, but merely provides the mechanical/electronic toggling of
the connected circuit during an alarm event within the smoke detector.
I would have a tendency to change the question a little bit by
asking if the burglar system should have smoke detectors connected to its
circuit. The answer to this is, like many things, it can be done but should
you do it........The prudent and safe method for combining life safety
system technologies is to rely upon published schematics/specifications of
manufacturers under the auspices of listing agencies who have reviewed and
tested equipments and their interconnectivity. Any other method carries
significant contingent liablilty. As for this West Virginia Hillbilly, we
rely on the experts.
Thanks for your informative emails.
Kind
regards,
Owen S.
Higgins, President
Electronic
Specialty Company
**********************************
Gentlemen
This is an age old question and one whose answer has specific intent. Even
if a systems is not required, it must meet all requirements applicable for
that system. Many burglar alarm panels are also listed by a nationally
recognized testing laboratory such as FM or UL for the intended use. They
contain circuits which are monitored for integrity, do make provision for
appropriate notification appliance circuits and place fire alarm signals in
priority ahead of non-fire alarm signals.
The topic comes up regularly in discussion with fire officials and other
Authoriities Having Jurisdiction. Consider Ken's point about the
subsriber's expectation of system performance. FDNY and sepcifically RS
17-12 of the Building Code of the City of New York has to date prohibited
the use of combination systems and these are actually listed for intended
use. RS17-12 is houshold and, for the most part, the City has lookled the
other way concerning enforcement. Commerical applications using combination
systems require a variance and are usually not granted.
There is a legal definition of a fire alarm system and it resides in
Reference Standard 55-1 of the New York State Building Code (Codes, Rules
and Regulations of the State of New York, Volume 9, Executive). This
Reference Standard is NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm Code, 1993 edition. On
page 13, Section 1-4 states "Fire Alarm System. A system or portion of a
combination system consisting of components and circuits arranged to monitor
and annunciate the status of fire alarm or supervisory signal initiating
devices and to initiate appropriate response to those signals." Automatic
Fire Detectors of the smoke sensing type are initiating devices.
The same chapter states: "Initiating Device. A system coponent that
originates transmission of a change of state condition, such as a smoke
detector, manual fire alarm box, supervisory switch, etc." Yes, you
probably can go to Home Depot for ten dollars and purchase a battery
operated smoke detector. Most of these devices do not have contacts to
interface to initaiting device circuits and are definitely not considered by
listing agencies for use in systems. Power is not supervised and are
totally incompatible with the control equipment. There are thousands of
accounts of battery operated smoke detectors in private dwellings failing
due to expired batteries. The result has been significant loss of life. It
is impossible to accurately state that connecting individual devices to
another panel does not form a system considering the earlier definition of
Fire Alarm System.
But the entire issue of required vs. non-required systems and what has to
comply with what has caused confusion for many years. Those most familiar
with The National Fire Alarm Code and specifically the many committees
responsible for actions regarding updating of same unanimously agree, that
whether the system is required or non-required it must be installed in a
code compliant fashion. NFPA 72 is in cycle now and the Fundamentals
Committee (resposnible for Chapter 1) has voted to include language stating
that whether required or not required the system must be installed per code.
Those are not the precise words but that is the intent.
The argument Tom makes for using devices and connecting them to a burglar
alarm panel seems logical until one examines why these methods an generally
unacceptable. Unrealistic expectation of the end user is but one of the
problems. I know of one very large, international company whose sales staff
repeatedly informed users and subscribers that the system was non-compliant
and even had the customer sign a statenment to that affect. Unfortuneately
when systems did not perform to expectations due to such non-compliance it
was the installaing company who stood the loss, compensated the subscriber
for damages yet only modified their selling techniques after the losses
became staggering. I know of no particular instance where injury or loss of
life occurred due to neglect by that company but have heard, annecdotally,
of such happening to other firms. Court rulings, inspite of the signed
statement, took the company to task because it was the enterprise and not
the customer who had the expertise and should have know better.
I hope that provides some further insight and light about Tom's question.
Respectfully
James M. Mundy, Jr.
CPP, CDT, CFPS, SET, SFPE
President
Empire Automatic Fire Alarm Association
***********************************
Ken, think about defending the alarm company in the event of any fire loss.
Plaintiff Attorney: Mr. Alarm Company, are you familiar with the industry
standards relating to the installation of fire alarms?
Alarm Company: Yes
Plaintiff Attorney: Why did you agree to install a system that does not meet
even the minimum standard?
Alarm Company: Well your client did not want to pay for a total fire alarm
system, so we obliged him by installing a partial system, you know something
is better than nothing.
Plaintiff Attorney: You are the expert and you are saying that you agreed to
follow directives from a novice who knows nothing about the codes and
standards and you agreed to install a sub-standard system? Where in the code
is "something better than nothing" ?
Well Ken I really would not want to be Mr. Alarm Company. If you can't meet
the code don't touch it!
Bud