# Nfpa 72



## ajmcfm (Apr 7, 2010)

With respect to the requirements of NFPA 72, can anyone recall if the standard addresses the use of pass codes or passwords to cancel the response of fire services? It seems that as of recent, monitoring companies are calling the protected premises and asking for a pass code or pass word to verify if there is anything. Once the monitoring company receives the "proper password/passcode" they are then advising the fire dispatch that the FD can disregard.


----------



## Coug Dad (Apr 7, 2010)

are you talking about single family houses or commercial buildings?


----------



## ajmcfm (Apr 7, 2010)

Commercial occupancies.


----------



## Coug Dad (Apr 7, 2010)

I do not believe the system is allowed to be reset until the FD arrives.  I will check for chapter and verse.


----------



## FM William Burns (Apr 7, 2010)

Since we don't know what type of system (central station, remote receiving, supervising station etc.) the answer is:

No - for alarm initiating curcuit signals

Yes - for supervisory circuit signals

You will find what you need in Chapter 26 of the 2010 edition or similar chapter in older editions. If you are using a 90"s edition it's in Fundementals.  Central Stations and Remote Receiving facilities are required to contact emergency forces for all alarm signals before calling the client with exception to supervisory trouble signals.


----------



## ajmcfm (Apr 7, 2010)

I understand that the first responsibility of the monitoring agency (remote or central) is to re-transmit the alarm to the emergency services. It is after this occurs. My concern is that if the premises evacuated, who is there to take a call from the monitoring company OR if the premises is initiating the call, how can one be sure what caused the alarm activation?


----------



## Coug Dad (Apr 7, 2010)

The monitoring company may advise the responding fire department to disregard the alarm, but what Fire Department would follow that advice?


----------



## ajmcfm (Apr 7, 2010)

I'm making reference to alarm signals, not trouble or supervisory.


----------



## FM William Burns (Apr 7, 2010)

See 10.10 of 72 2010.

If you have an addressible system responders can check event history to determine what device was activated and history of re-set alarms.  If it's an issue with tracking alarm activations for citations, the same can apply.  Other than that, I believe the facility is held responsible and liable for re-setting since the code assumption is that the system is owner by where it's installed.  Regarding the monitoring facility promoting the re-set, refer back to Chapter 26 and the code does not give them that responsibility.


----------



## cda (Apr 7, 2010)

ajmcfm

His question is::: unles he corrects me

1. fire alarm goes off

2. monitoring company calls fire dept

3. fire dept is responding

4. monitoring company calls back, because business owner used correct "password/code" and told monitoring company there was no problem

Our fd went to turning around on disregard from monitoring company.

I do not believe 72 addresses this issue more of an AHJ policy thing

ajmcfm

Glad you found your way to the board, they do beat you up once in awhile


----------



## FM William Burns (Apr 7, 2010)

Canceling Alarms



> ajmcfm





> Glad you found your way to the board, they do beat you up once in awhile



Yes, welcome to the board! No intentions on my part to beat anyone up. 

If Cda is interpreting your intent correctly, the only avenue one may have to mitigate this type of behavior is by possibly applying something from the adopted fire code for “authority in emergencies” like IFC 104.11.3 (loose) or from the fire alarm section [*901.8. *It shall be unlawful for any person to remove, tamper with or otherwise disturb any fire hydrant, fire detection and alarm system, fire suppression system, or other fire appliance required by this code except for the purpose of extinguishing fire, training purposes, recharging or making necessary repairs, or when approved by the fire code official.] or something from NFPA 1 like [*10.7.1.4 *Persons shall not make, issue, post, or maintain any regulation or order, written or verbal, that would require any person to take any unnecessary delaying action prior to reporting a fire to the fire department.]

If they re-set the alarm or we get informed through dispatch that the facility cancelled the alarm, staff vehicle still responds to investigate and we deal with it through education with management as to why it’s a risky practice.

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]


----------



## cda (Apr 7, 2010)

if a fire truck is in route and the monitoring company calss and says it is a false alarm or whatever

they are not canceling the fire truck that is responding

it would either be the officer in charge of the truck or the standard operating procedures that cancels the fire truck from going to the building.

NFPA 72 does not address this issue


----------



## Uncle Bob (Apr 7, 2010)

Reading ya'll's fire stuff makes me double my alzhiemers med; but, it's sure good to see you here.  On the old BB we didn't see a lot fire code talk (before the RFS debates).  It's good to see us on the same forum and helping each other.

Thanks,

Uncle Bob


----------



## ajmcfm (Apr 8, 2010)

No offense taken and never thought I was getting beaten up. Been in this business for quite a while so b@**busting is expected.

I thought that years ago, previous editions of NFPA had wording to address this type of action. Maybe Uncle Bob is right and I should double the meds!!

Just thinking about the liability end of things. Radio traffic is recorded and I can see a day when a slick litigation professional gets to take on a case where an FD vehicles is involved in a crash and the tape clearly says proper pass code was given by the facility and the FD is still responding in or the FD takes a recall based upon a proper pass code given and then a fire loss occurs.

We all know how litigation goes!


----------



## FM William Burns (Apr 8, 2010)

Liability

I agree with ya, but please don't use UB's meds.

He gets them from Gautamalla (spelling)  

Regarding the potentials in liability; we run the same way.  We will step down engine, ladder  and rescue if dispatch informs us of the facility request or monitoring company call back but send a staff (typically me) vehicle anyway to investigate.  They don't like seeing me because I am the one who can write the tickets.  I try to educate when we encounter these types of situatuions.  We can be sued for pretty much anything and that's why we record calls, response and have been forced to have cab cams.

You know, come to think of it, I seem to recall something back in the day maybe 1987 Edition of 72 or I'll be calling UB for some koolaid.


----------



## ajmcfm (Apr 8, 2010)

I'm glad someone besides me thought there might have been something in the past that addressed the concern. At least I wasn't drinkning bleach.

In any event, I submit to NFPA for an answer about my concern and I just got a reply back. In a nutshell, it says there are procedures for handling and re-transmitting alarms and it specifies what has to transpire.....and there are no provisions or exceptions to permit passcodes or passwords to circumvent the system.

Here is the reponse from NFPA and please understand that I am sharing this with everyone with the understanding that this is NOT a formal interpretation from NFPA.

***********************************************************************

Mr. Morgan,

NFPA 72-2010, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code™, Chapter 26, covers the requirements for the performance, installation, and operation of fire alarm systems at a continuously attended supervising station and between the protected premises and the continuously attended supervising station and the various transmission technologies available.

Section 26.3 provides the requirements for alarm systems for central station service, Section 26.4 for proprietary supervising station systems and Section 26.5 for remote supervising station alarm systems.

Section 26.3.7 provides for the disposition of signals from a protected premises to a central station.  These include: Section 26.3.7.1, alarm signals; Section 26.3.7.2, guard’s tour supervisory signals; Section 26.3.7.3, supervisory signals; Section 26.3.7.4, trouble signals and Section 26.3.7.5, test signals.  For alarm signals, Section 26.3.7.1.2 requires the central station perform the following actions: (1) Immediately retransmit the alarm to the communications center, (2) Dispatch a runner or technician to the protected premises, (3) Immediately notify the subscriber and (4) Provide notice to the subscriber or authority having jurisdiction, or both, if required.  Note exception due to a prearranged test.  No other exception is provided for a pass code or password.  Unique personal identification codes are provided for test signals only as permitted by Sections 26.3.7.5, 26.3.7.5.5 and 26.3.7.5.6.

The requirements for disposition of signals from remote supervising station alarm systems are much more relaxed.  Refer to Section 26.5.5.  This section enables the alarm signal to be transmitted directly to the communications center.  Further, if the remote supervising station is at a location other than the communications center, alarm signals must be immediately retransmitted to the communications center.  Again, for alarm, there is no exception for pass codes or passwords.

Important Notice!  This correspondence is not a Formal Interpretation issued pursuant to NFPA Regulations.  Any opinion expressed is the personal opinion of the author, and does not necessarily represent the official position of the NFPA or its Technical Committees.  In addition, this correspondence is neither intended, nor should be relied upon, to provide professional consultation or services.


----------



## FM William Burns (Apr 8, 2010)

Now What to Do?

Since my name is not Mr. Morgan how do we deal with the issue?

Personally, we use 10.7.1.4 as referenced down there somewhere for facilities where our education does not work or where they forget to take their meds. If one uses the IFC then possibly the others referenced could fit. The only other option would be to draft an ordinance and try to sell it to council to see if it flys. Typically the educational opportunities worked for us.

Meanwhile, I'll go into my dungon and try to find the 84 and 87 editions of 72 and see what the fundementals sections said and if I find it, I'll put it up.

Thanks for the non-formal interp


----------



## cda (Apr 8, 2010)

from nfpa 72 2007

8.3.7.1.2  The central station shall perform the following actions:

(1)* 	Immediately retransmit the alarm to the public fire service communications center.

(2) 	Dispatch a runner or technician to the protected premises to arrive within 2 hours after receipt of a signal if equipment needs to be manually reset by the prime contractor. Except where prohibited by the authority having jurisdiction, the runner or technician shall be permitted to be recalled prior to arrival at the premises if a qualified representative of the subscriber at the premises can provide the necessary resetting of the equipment and is able to place the system back in operating condition.

(3) 	Immediately notify the subscriber.

(4) 	Provide notice to the subscriber or authority having jurisdiction, or both, if required.

Provide notice to the subscriber or authority having jurisdiction, or both,             """"""if required."""""

I still go back to it is a fire department policy if they continue to the building or not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not NFPA


----------



## beach (Apr 8, 2010)

Do you charge for "False" alarms?


----------



## cda (Apr 8, 2010)

not yet, they have looked into it

I  see the problem of what is a false alarm???

kid pulls a  pull station??

lightning sets off the system??

burned popcorn??

tech working on system and forgets to call??

plus we do not run that many to begin with


----------



## permitguy (Apr 8, 2010)

If dispatch gets information from the facility explaining a confirmed false alarm (kid pulled a pull-station), the Officer on the first due apparatus may slow to a non-emergent response and call off other responding apparatus, but that would be it. Someone from the FD is going to show up and see what's going on.  If there is a problem with the system, they notify the bureau, and we perform the more time-consuming follow up so they can return to service.


----------



## gvictor (Apr 12, 2010)

Agree with Permitguy, if we respond then first due company is going in, even if advised by monitoring company.  We have had a situation where the monitoring company notified FD regarding water flow condition, call the location and was told that no fire existed, notified FD, first due company continued to respond code 2, saw smoke and called additional alarms.  Guard on duty did not know what was going on in the facility.

Greg


----------



## crothemi (Apr 15, 2010)

Response

In my area the fire department will always respond to a call, but when they are notified that it as a false alarm / no fire they shut off the lights and sirens on the trucks and respond at a normal pace.

They still want to see what the problem was for themselves.


----------

