Security Dealer & Integrator

JAN 2014

Find news and information for the executive corporate security director, CSO, facility manager and assets protection manager on issues of policy, products, incidents, risk management, threat assessments and preparedness.

Issue link: http://sdi.epubxp.com/i/246277

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 41 of 69

FIRE & LIFE SAFETY Trend: CO Detection & Combo Units When your state's new residential (one- and two-family home) building code is adopted, be sure to look for any new CO requirements in the code in the section following the paragraph requiring smoke alarms. For commercial buildings, the Building Code will require carbon monoxide alarms in Group 'I' or 'R' occupancies which contain "a fuel-burning appliance" or are part of "a building which has an attached garage" (not ventilated parking structures and open parking). Since "carbon monoxide detection systems which include CO detectors and audible notification appliances" are permitted, I expect the use of combination smoke/CO detectors will become more prevalent, in lieu of providing separate detectors for each. This application can give the professional alarm company an edge. Issue: Paperwork The scramble for alarm companies to keep on top of all the new paperwork required to be supplied to system owners is expanding in the 2013 edition of NFPA 72. Additionally, the 2012 Building/Fire Codes require that monitoring service providers notify the responding agency (i.e. fire department) whenever a customer's monitoring services are terminated. More significantly, the 2013 edition of NFPA 72 requires that commercial fire alarm system owners provide an affidavit identifying and verifying the party responsible for the inspections and testing of that system annually to their AHJ. This affidavit must also include the responsibilities — including lists of what will be tested and what will not — and qualifications of the parties doing the work, and be signed by the service provider (Qualifications are delineated in the Annex of 72 and deserve a second look). Practically speaking, our customers will not be aware of the new requirement when this edition of the code gets adopted in your jurisdiction. So it will be up to the alarm company to start this process by drafting 40 and signing a letter, then delivering this to their customers with whom they have Annual Test Inspection agreements, and include all this information. And at the same time, it will behoove the alarm company to inform their customer with whom they do NOT have signed T&I; contracts, of this new requirement, and include with that notification a quote to provide the required services. While not easily or universally enforced, much unpleasantness will ensue whenever the owner and local fire official start asking why these services are not being provided. Issue: Two-Line Digital Alarm Communicator Transmitters (DACTs) The 2013 NFPA 72 is making it difficult to continue installing two-line DACTs as the communication means for reporting commercial fire alarm signals. For example, the supervised communication test signal requirement in the 2013 Edition was increased to once every six hours (four times as often as the previous 24-hour requirement). That's assuming you are allowed to use a second phone line. With this new edition, you must first get permission from the local code authority before connecting a second phone line as the DACT's backup method. In order to gain this approval, you will have to explain that a newer type of second technology (i.e. data network/Internet or cellular signal) is not available at that site and your only remaining choice is to use a second phone line — good luck with that. Trend: Mass Notification Systems Non-fire systems are increasingly being incorporated with commercial fire alarm systems; however, I am skeptical about the number of Mass Notification Systems that will materialize, since they are not required by code. Occupancies using these systems will typically remain the domain of only the largest contractors. This means that the majority of alarm companies will never perform this www.SecurityInfoWatch.com | SD&I; | January 2014 (continues on page 61)

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Security Dealer & Integrator - JAN 2014