In today’s episode of The Fire Protection Podcast, Drew sits down with Shawn Mahoney once again, this time, to walk through key changes to NFPA 72 and the impact on fire alarm codes.
Some of the biggest changes center around remote inspections, cybersecurity, and batteries–including lithium-ion batteries–and the introduction of a new term: “observation.” Shawn dives into the biggest changes from the 2022 edition and highlights some of the big changes we can expect in the 2025 edition, set to be released in the fall.
Watch or listen to this episode for an inside look at past and upcoming changes to NFPA 72 as AHJs start to make the switch to the latest code years.
Timecodes:
- 00:00 – Introduction
- 02:08 – Conference & Expo Recap
- 03:46 – Shawn’s Role at NFPA
- 07:43 – Remote Testing
- 13:38 – Cybersecurity
- 17:52 – Batteries
- 25:49 – Software Access
- 28:53 – Abandoned Equipment
- 30:45 – Observations
- 34:09 – Tagging Program
- 36:10 – Changes in the 2025 Edition
- 40:44 – Wrap-Up
Full Transcript
Drew Slocum:
This is episode 67 of The Fire Protection Podcast, powered by Inspect Point. Today, my guest again is Shawn Mahoney from NFPA–on their technical team, technical services team. Shawn was great last time, earlier this spring we had him on, talking about changes to NFPA 25. This episode is geared to what’s coming in NFPA 72, the fire alarm codes and standard–or the standard. More focused on the 2022 edition and changes there, as well as getting into some of the 2025, which is right around the corner.
So Shawn is a wealth of knowledge on anything NFPA, but specifically 25 and 72, which are two powerful standards within our industry. So, we kind of go through the top…I think there’s five to 10 more, like seven to 10 different topics, and the changes in 2022 and 2025, dealing with batteries, cybersecurity, some stuff that’s getting tossed into the annex for color coding and tagging. So again, great to have Shawn on to update in a quick hour format to the industry and get some information out there to the fire industry. Hopefully you enjoy the podcast and yeah, again, welcome Shawn Mahoney.
All right, we’re live. Thank you, Shawn, for coming on the podcast today, again.
Drew Slocum:
Thanks for coming on again. We had a great reception of the last podcast we did on updates to NFPA 25. So, wanted to do this for NFPA 72 since there’s been a lot of interest there and some of the potential changes. Before we get into that, we kind of talked about C&E, and what were your overall thoughts of C&E, and I think we did the podcast to kind of promote, to help promote it, but any of your final thoughts from the conference in Orlando?
Shawn Mahoney:
It feels like every year is better than the last, which is good. I mean, that’s what we strive for. We had a big attendance in the expo between exhibitors and people there, and a lot of people in the educational sessions. Which is, it’s always great to see because I’m part of the group that, we go through the proposals for educational sessions and choose them, and being able to see that, alright, we picked ones that people really like. The rooms are packed. Everyone’s really interested and asking questions. That’s really encouraging to see, and I’ve heard great comments about everything in the conference side.
That being said, if you are interested, anybody listening, if you’re interested in presenting at our conference and expo next year, which is going to be in Las Vegas, I highly recommend to submit a proposal before September. September 9th, I believe, is the deadline. If you just Google NFPA conference and expo 2025, there’s a call for proposals in there. So I look forward to seeing what anyone can submit. I’m always encouraging people–the more we have to choose from, the better selection we can have for educational sessions.
Drew Slocum:
I saw some, there’s some newer topics this year too. I think you guys always have the best topics and there’s a lot of ’em, right? It’s a very wide range. NFPA covers a wide range of fire and safety and security.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, it’s the hard part of our job is our stakeholder group is so wide, so you have to try to get something for everybody. That’s why we had, I think it was 130 educational sessions. It’s just a lot, all the information for people.
Drew Slocum:
Wow, that’s crazy. So you sit on the tech committee at NFPA. I guess explain your role, obviously, and then just your group’s role and how that compares to everything else inside NFPA.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, so I’m in the technical services group at NFPA and we sit in the engineering group. So we’ve got engineering, and in the engineering group there’s standards development, and then there’s our group that sits next to them. So standards development, those are all the staff liaisons. They’re responsible for running the technical committees that are the volunteers that actually create the standards, you know, go through the standards development process. That whole group is responsible for that. We’ve got editorial in there, standards administration, all that stuff.
We sit on tech services side. So we serve as technical resources within NFPA, within the association. So, if Training wants to develop a new training, we are the resources that help. We’re the technical SMEs that do that work. So we do training, we do blogs for communications, we do a lot of different fact sheets, and we do a lot of the content that goes into NFPA link, which is our digital platform for access to all of NFPA codes and standards.
We provide the enhanced content, the direct navigation, all of that information comes from our group. We do create a lot of outward facing things. You see us writing blogs, we create fact sheets, things like that. But if you are an NFPA member, if you ask a technical question, people always think that because I’m in tech services, I’m the person that answers that. If you ask a technical question, so if you’re an NFPA member, you’re allowed to ask questions on standards–codes and standards. If you submit it, it actually goes to the staff liaison responsible for that document and they answer that question. So that’s a service we offer. It’s just not through our technical services group.
So I do get that often people are like, oh, you’re in tech services, you must answer all those technical questions. And that’s not actually us. We’re creating all the content, the things that NFPA puts out.
Drew Slocum:
Gotcha. Yeah. Yeah, that’s great clarification because I’ve been, even talking to you this past spring. I didn’t really understand it all, so that’s great.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, it’s a wide role, which I think we all really like, everyone kind of picks different, you know, topical areas. We have technical leads, like John Hart is the technical lead for fire protection systems and building life safety. So I kind of work under him, but I do more of the fire protection system stuff. So sprinkler, fire alarm, all that. But then we’ve got SMEs like Val Ziavras, she does a lot of the building life safety, so NFPA 101, all that kind of stuff. We all have our own little niches, but we can talk about all that different stuff as well.
Drew Slocum:
Speaking of that, I could throw this at the end too, but I always ask people, what’s your favorite type of fire protection system?
Shawn Mahoney:
I mean, I just like sprinkler systems and fire alarm systems. It’s hard to say which one I like better. I do like the electronics and programming and all of that in fire alarm systems. So I would say that’s probably my favorite. But I do like the mechanical-ness of a sprinkler system. In some way, the simplicity of it I really like.
Drew Slocum:
Sure. Yeah, everybody…I gravitate toward…I came up more in the sprinkler realm, but I gravitate to some of the suppression ones, like chemical suppression. It’s just interesting. It’s kind of like a combo of different things. Plus chemistry, I guess water is chemistry too, but…
Shawn Mahoney:
In my career path so far, I haven’t really done a lot with special suppression–other than water mist, which is like that between sprinkler systems and special suppression systems.
Drew Slocum:
Right. Yeah, water mist. That’s really cool too. All right, let’s get into this. So NFPA 72. We’re on…I think 2025 is…
Shawn Mahoney:
2025 will most likely be put out in September, I believe. There’s an August standards council meeting, and they’re most likely going to approve it for issuance. Usually it’s like September-ish timeframe. You’ll see.
Drew Slocum:
I see most jurisdictions in 2016, 2019, 2022 is in there. So I kind of wanted to focus on, hey, what’s different in 2022? And obviously mix in ‘25 since we’re almost there, but I would love to kind of go down your top, I don’t know, five to 10, whatever it is, of changes for 2022 and 2025.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, certainly. I mean, we can start with the big one that we saw a lot. I mean, we’re still seeing a lot coming up–even in 25, 13, 72–is the idea of being able to remotely test or access things. So 72 added a whole section in chapter 23, which is on remote access. So, whether you’re doing remote access to complete testing and maintenance, or you’re doing just remote access to look at what the control unit’s saying, or if you’re doing it for software updates, there’s requirements that you need to follow when you’re doing that. And the requirements are depending on what you’re doing, but there’s five main requirements. The first one is you have to have a manual means to be able to shut off the remote connection between whatever computer you’re using, whatever you’re using to connect to that control unit. If the person who’s remotely accessing that control unit goes inactive for an hour, it automatically shuts off that connection. So, just to keep people from being able to go up to that computer and do things to that control unit.
Drew Slocum:
Interesting.
Shawn Mahoney:
And then, you can only work–like if you’re doing any resetting or silencing or operating any emergency control functions–that area of the fire alarm system needs to be taken out of service. So you need to have a plan. You’re basically impairing that part of the system to be able to work on it, which means you need to have a qualified person still on site to be able to do the resetting and a silencing of all those functions.
So, what usually this remote access is being used for is, you’ll have a manufacturer or a contractor where they have their a A-star programmer. They don’t have to send the A-team programmer to every single site to do work. They will send maybe their newer technicians, technicians that don’t know that specific thing. They can have a technician remotely access and help someone on-site do that work without having to drive that person to every site. That’s what you’re mostly seeing the remote access be used for. So you’re always still going to have that qualified person on site to be able to do the work that needs to be done at a building.
Drew Slocum:
Gotcha. So there’s somebody physically still there, even if whatever the lead technician is diving into the panel, there still needs to be somebody there.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yes. There still needs to be…for all of those cases. And then also, if you’re doing any software update, chapter 14 still would’ve required you to do testing on all the changes to the software that you made anyway. So you still have to have someone there to do all that testing as well. So even if you’re just doing–and then plus, if you’re doing executive software update, you still have to have someone there to do all that testing for you.
Drew Slocum:
Gotcha. Does NFPA 915 fit into that at all? You know, because of remote testing and inspection?
Shawn Mahoney:
I’m not sure. It’s very possible. I haven’t really dived too deep into the 915 stuff to know. I think mostly right now, 915 is mostly around allowing for inspections and things like that…those requirements to see where that lands. But I mean, I know 72 kind of covers a lot of that stuff for fire alarm.
Drew Slocum:
Yeah, it already covers it internally anyway. I think 915 is mainly for, it’s a big piece for the AHJ, but again, it’s a template for NFPA 72 and 25 if they’re allowing it, which they’ve kind of got to.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, 25 allows for remote testing. There’s the requirement in there, as long as you’re completing the same test remotely, you’re allowed to do remote testing. But there is a requirement, after a certain amount of time, you still have to go in person and do it. We’re seeing that across all the standards, same fire pumps, everything, is allowing you to do that remote testing.
Drew Slocum:
Gotcha, gotcha. Now, what is qualified, right? Does it specify in that remote access, where can it be a building owner or does it have to be a qualified, I know qualified personnel is a term in a lot of NFPA standards.
Shawn Mahoney:
Qualified in 72 and in most NFPA standards are basically they have the experience and knowledge or certification as per the authority having jurisdiction. So it’s all to the authority having jurisdiction. They might say, “Hey, yeah, the building owner is good enough if you are doing something simple.” But they’re most likely probably going to say some level of certification or some licensure that the authority having jurisdiction provides. It’s the same thing with 25–that qualified term. Codes and standards try to stay out of the qualification because it’s all up to the authority having jurisdiction.
Drew Slocum:
It’s great. Yeah. Yeah. It’s all over the place. Yeah, I can imagine that. That’s a good one. What do you got next?
Shawn Mahoney:
Let’s see. Next one is going to be cybersecurity. So talking about remote access, everything being connected, fire alarm systems are just as much at threat for a cyber attack as anything else that’s connected to the Internet. So, in the 2022 edition, there was a new chapter added. So chapter 11 was added, which is just one section long, and it just says: Where required by other laws, codes, or standards, you need to incorporate some level of cybersecurity basically in your system. And then an Annex J was added with all of the requirements, cybersecurity provisions, standards, evidence of compliance documentation for cybersecurity. But because it’s in the annex, it’s just a recommendation. So, you see the word “should” be used. So these are all just things that should be done. If we’re talking about 2025 edition, what happened was Annex J got moved up into chapter 11, and now all of the “shoulds” have become “shalls,” and they’re all requirements for cybersecurity to be provided again, still where required by other laws, codes, or governings.
Drew Slocum:
Gotcha. Yeah cybersecurity is…I remember them talking about that being a whole topic in 72 and just other places too.
Shawn Mahoney:
And a lot of it we’re seeing is manufacturers need to get their products tested to some sort of standard on cybersecurity. You need to have some sort of protocol for making sure that things are secure. One protocol could be just not even connecting it to the Internet, but that also could leave it more at threat because it doesn’t have updates and things like that.
So it’s just a never-ending snowball of how you figure out that cybersecurity. But a lot of it really does come down to manufacturers getting that testing done, following the outside standards. There’s some UL standards on that cybersecurity, and then providing that evidence of compliance for it as well as that documentation.
Drew Slocum:
Yeah, it’s mainly on the software side, it’s cloud based, and there’s a lot secure in the cloud, but it’s got to be done. And I’m glad that’s in there because…
Shawn Mahoney:
Actually, an interesting thing. I know we’ve been talking a lot about advancements in technology and you see fire alarms, everything’s going addressable and more connected, but you’re also seeing this other space where places that really want their sites to be secure are going more conventional with fire alarm systems in order to make sure that’s their way of being cyber secure. We’re not connecting to anything. It’s purely conventional. We don’t have to worry about those things, which is just an interesting way of things getting, I guess, less advanced, but more robust.
Drew Slocum:
So wait, the conventional panel or just not connected? Oh, so not an addressable panel. So it’s not an addressable panel that’s not connected to the internet. It’s an actual conventional panel?
Shawn Mahoney:
So a lot of places–not a lot of places, but I’ve heard of places that’ll do it. They’ll say, “We’re just going to do a conventional panel. We’re not connecting it to anything. It’s going to be standalone because we don’t want to have to worry about connecting it to anything and how it could be attacked or connected to any of our other systems.”
Drew Slocum:
Gotcha. Interesting. Wow.
Shawn Mahoney:
Which is an interesting thing I saw. I was at Protectowire a couple months ago through SFPE. I’m on the board there, and we had one of our meetings there, and they were showing us, they were like we have a big demand for… they’re building a lot of conventional panels because they sell some of their own labeled panels on the side, and they’re like, yeah, we have a huge demand for conventional equipment because of that cybersecurity.
Drew Slocum:
Interesting. Yeah. Yeah, I could see that. I could definitely see that depending on what you’re protecting, and majority of it, it’s not going that way, but might be a growth. So. All right, cybersecurity, what do we got…What do we got next?
Shawn Mahoney:
Well, the next big topic that was changed in the 2022 edition is going to be batteries. So this is a big thing in all codes and standards that we’ve been seeing, right? Like energy storage systems, lithium batteries, anything battery related, we’re trying to protect against.
So the committee now requires that–it was effective January 1st, 2024, so it wasn’t effective at the time of the issuance of the standard, but now we’re in 2024. All rechargeable batteries that are used for secondary power supply need to be listed by a nationally recognized testing laboratory. So you’re going to need to use UL-listed batteries in your control units. Because we want to make sure that the batteries that we’re using are of good quality and they’re not going to cause a risk to the control unit and actually provide that power.
Drew Slocum:
Or just, Hey, tonight, you already have the–I’m in New York City right now, and they have so many issues with unlisted batteries and unlisted chargers and that whole thing, right? So it’s kind of a combo obviously you’re providing secondary power, but also you want a listed battery in there so it’s not starting a fire.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, because a fire in your fire alarm cabinet is not going to be very good.
Drew Slocum:
No. Yeah, that wouldn’t look good. Interestingly enough, I know batteries is a big, I know you got a few more kind of subtopics there, but when we did some analysis a year or so ago, we kind of took a look at all fire alarm inspections and the Inspect Point platform and battery deficiencies were–now, there’s a wide range of deficiencies inside of battery. Could be the date could be just say it could be a noncritical, it could be a critical, obviously, a replacement. But that was, I think 12% of batteries there was an issue with, and they probably fixed it immediately, but it was just interesting. That was number one.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, and it’s interesting because you rely on that. In the case of a fire, one of the big things that they’re going to do is shut power off to a building. So you want to have that backup power.
And interestingly enough to the 2025 edition, there was some more changes about batteries. In chapter 14, talking about inspection of batteries. You’re no longer just looking at the date of manufacture of the batteries, mostly because a lot of times that’s not actually provided, but now when you look at that battery, you need to make sure every year that the batteries at least have 60% of the shelf life remaining of the battery, based on that used by/best by date on the battery. Which is interesting, because now you’re looking at the manufacturer to say, okay, when do you say that this battery is good until? And then you’re using that date to confirm that the battery’s still going to be in that use by/best by, shelf life for the next year of the battery.
Drew Slocum:
Yeah, that’s interesting. What are our manufacturers of the battery saying? Usually a shelf life is, do you know?
Shawn Mahoney:
I don’t know off the top of my head, but I think, I mean, you’re looking at maybe like six years, five years, something like that.
It’s not like it’s, it’s changing how we’re using batteries. Most people we’re just putting the install date on it anyways, not even looking at the date. Because a lot of cases, it might not be on the battery. The manufacturer’s going to print it and they’re going to most likely put their best by date, so you can now just use the best by date instead of trying to figure out when was this thing manufactured? To use that.
Drew Slocum:
That’s interesting data. And I think, you know, the industry and people that are using digital platforms, there’s–for the top deficiencies, you want a little bit more data on it, right? If you can warn your customer that, three months ahead of time, this work is done. Instead of showing up and then writing it up, you can give them analysis, “Hey, this is coming due. We need to replace this.”
So I think there’s some really great data points you can get with that, and dates are one of them, whether it’s batteries on fire alarm panels, whether it’s sprinkler head testing, whether it’s fire extinguisher, hydro dates, there’s a lot of analytics you can do if you’re gathering it correctly.
Shawn Mahoney:
That is true. Yeah, it all comes down to gathering, using it in a usable way to be able to inform the codes and standards. We talked about this last time when we talked about 25. We’re seeing the change in some of these frequencies because now we’re starting to get data in on things. We saw the change in the dry sprinkler testing and the quick response sprinklers. The more data we can get, the better we can refine those frequencies there.
And there still is an allowance in 72 and in 25 for you to use your own frequencies, but you need to back it up with data. So, I do know there are some sites, or there are some companies that have a lot of buildings and they start to collect their own data and say, basically these failure rates are…we’re going to push out inspections this much. Obviously, it has to get approved by the authority having jurisdiction, but you are allowed to change those based on the data that you collect and analyze and it gets approved.
Drew Slocum:
At the end of the day, who’s approving it, the AHJ? A lot of times that goes back to the insurer as well, and they’re just going to point to it back to the standard a lot of times. But if you’re self-insured or you’re your own entity, obviously you can back it up with whatever you got.
Shawn Mahoney:
And then along the same lines as talking about batteries and listed batteries, was a change in the correction factor. So when you design a fire alarm system, you’ve got to have that required battery backup, whether it’s, you know, 15 minutes in alarm, 24 in standby, or five minutes in alarm, 24 standby. And then you have to put that correction factor.
Prior to 2022, it was a 20% correction factor. Now, you have to increase your battery up 25%. And that’s just a better understanding of how batteries work, how the aging of the batteries are. We want that little bit more safety factored to allow for those aging batteries. Also, knowing that, potentially, it’s a higher deficiency area that we want to have a little more capacity in there when we’re doing our calculations.
Drew Slocum:
So that calculation or that formula is going to go from 20 to 25% in the 2025 code?
Shawn Mahoney:
In the 2022 code. It’s already there,
Drew Slocum:
2022. Okay. It’s already there, so might as well just do it now, right? But I know there’s different platforms that’ll kind calculate that for you.
Shawn Mahoney:
Or the manufacturer will do it on their specs, things like that, but pay attention to it. Because they might still be using that 20% safety factor. They might not have increased up to that 25.
Drew Slocum:
Interesting. Yeah, good point. I like it.
All right. What have we got? Let’s see. Software access?
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, so this one comes up a lot that I hear about. And I’ve seen people posting about it on the fire alarm groups and stuff. Is there anything that requires us to be able to have access to our fire alarm unit, or is it just the installing contractor gets to keep that software and only they can maintain it?
The answer is no, and 72 has always kind of been stating that, but now there is a section in there that says, “for all software that connects to and is part of the building life safety network components, the software security access or any means to obtain that access needs to be provided to the owner or the designated representative.” Meaning that you can’t hold the passwords hostage and say, only I’m maintaining this system. The owner has all of the access to that unit and they can have anybody work on it that they want.
Drew Slocum:
Interesting. So wait, if there’s a XXX brand panel there, the owner owns that fire alarm panel, right? Through the install. So they’ll have the passcode to get in. So if a distributor says, or contractor comes in and says, I’m the only one allowed to work on this. So with this kind of new part of the code, since they have access to that panel, anybody could come in and work on it?
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, I mean, as long as they’re qualified to do the work, the owner…So basically what this is saying is that the installing contractor, anybody who’s been working on it, can’t hold those passwords and access from the owner. So say the owner wants a different contractor and the new contractor says, I need the software access, the old contractor has to provide it, or the owner has to already have had it.
Drew Slocum:
Gotcha. That is a big step. That’s brand new?
Shawn Mahoney:
So that’s a new section in the 2022 edition.
Drew Slocum:
Wow. It’s a great movement toward a more open platform, open industry within fire alarm, because, traditionally, and I know who fought this, right, and we all know who fought it, but traditionally it’s like, very proprietary in nature. And owners and facility managers are not happy with that. It’s not the sprinklers, very open. I think some of the suppression side’s pretty open as well, but firearm alarm seemed to be pretty proprietary. And I guess now with that, it kind of opens it up right there. I mean, through the owner, right?
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah. I mean, the thing is you still have to get a qualified person, which means that the AHJ might still require that new person to be trained by the manufacturer. They still might have to have their training to work on it. Might be some holdback on that, but this is stating that they can’t hold the access from the owner.
Drew Slocum:
Yeah, that’s a great step and a big step in the industry.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, definitely.
Drew Slocum:
Cool.
Shawn Mahoney:
Next one I have here is talking about abandoning equipment. So, if you’re updating a system, maybe you’re moving some equipment or you’re not using a circuit or anything anymore, you’re required to remove any abandoned equipment or you have to mark the equipment that it’s no longer in service.
I’ve seen hotels that have three horn strobes on it, and it’s obvious that they just updated, updated, updated. But you’re like, “Well, which one goes off?” Or you’re in a room and one’s going off. You’re like, oh, do I actually go out? What about the other two? So the other two would need to be marked not in service, or they have to be removed. That’s just build-up of equipment.
Drew Slocum:
We grab it, we select as inactive. You can inactivate a piece of equipment. So it’s still there, but it’s inactive.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, the thing is though, it has to be marked on it. So this goes on…
Drew Slocum:
Physically on the device.
Shawn Mahoney:
So that’s a big thing with a lot of codes of standards. NFPA 101 says, if anything is obvious to the public that it’s a life safety feature, it has to be maintained. So this goes along that line. If you have a horn strobe there, it’s either going to be maintained and it’s going to work, or the general public has to know that it’s not working or you just need to remove it.
Drew Slocum:
Makes sense. Gotcha.
Shawn Mahoney:
That’s just going along that line. I remember seeing the pictures where there’s a bunch of horn strobes. I think it’s all been hotels…Which one’s the one to trust? So now it’s required to either market. I think a lot of cases people are probably just going to pull it down, put a junction box cover on it and call it a day.
Drew Slocum:
Cool.
Shawn Mahoney:
And then the next big one that has happened in chapter 14 on the ITM side, is the addition of the definition of an observation. So, an observation is “a suggested correction, improvement or enhancement to the fire alarm system that’s not considered an impairment or a deficiency.” So that’s the definition.
And then there’s a section in there that says, “If any observations are noted, they are permitted to be communicated to the system owner, but the system owner is not required to address them until they become an impairment or a deficiency.”
So, some might say that is not a huge change, but I think it’s a big change for the inspector, right? If you see an issue, because there’s a lot of stuff that’s not covered in an inspection, where it’s like, oh, the smoke detectors, you don’t have full coverage anymore because you added a partition, or your notification appliance isn’t in the right spot. That’s not necessarily a deficiency, right? Because we’re assuming the system was installed and accepted, but it’s something that you want to note to the owner, but sometimes you don’t want to note it because you don’t want it to look like a deficiency that the owner has to fix, but you’re just trying to provide them information. Now, you have that ability to give them an observation without that worry that all of a sudden the owner thinks it’s something they have to do. It’s just kind of giving you that ability to note those things.
Drew Slocum:
We call it a recommendation, and we use it in different sections of the platform. But it’s needed because you install it per the standard, but in 72 and 25 and others, it’s not sometimes covered. So you want, obviously, to alert the owner, but you also want to cover your ass, right? Make sure if there is something wrong, if something comes down to litigation, there is an issue, right? You want to document that. And there’s always a fine line of that too. How far do you go? You know, the inspection criteria is X, and then the installation criteria is a different standard, but how deep do you go?
So, take some photos, throw some recommendations in there, and they call it–I like how they define it as observation. I like that term better. And if they put that definition in there, hopefully that kind of works its way through different standards in NFPA as well.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, I think we were talking about 25 is the same thing where it’s like, “Well, if I see something that’s not–it’s a design issue and I think the owner should at least be aware of it, how do I note it that it’s not getting noted as a deficiency, but the owner’s still knowing? And now I don’t want to be responsible for saying, not saying it or saying the wrong thing or something.” Now you just, it’s defined as that observation. It’s just there just as a note, and now it’s kind of allowing that stream of information.
Drew Slocum:
Yeah, that’s great. I think UL-C had that up in Canada already. It’s already in there. I believe it’s in the later codes that they have. So again, it’s a great way to document.
Shawn Mahoney:
And then the other addition that’s happened in the 2022 edition is just adding an annex–still staying on that ITM side. It’s an annex for a tagging program for a fire alarm system. Again, it’s annex, it’s not required. It’s just a suggested tagging. And I think we were talking, Drew, you said that there’s a lot of jurisdictions that already do this, but I think it’s just added as a way to do it, similar to what we see in 25 where you have a tag goes on the control unit when you install the system stating who designed it, who installed it, then you have a service tag stating when was it last serviced, were there any deficiencies? Who’s the contractor? You have a yellow tag that goes on it if there are any deficiencies, and then you have a red tag that goes on it if there’s any impairment. So it’s a good way to be able to track what’s going on with that system right away with the tag on that control unit.
Drew Slocum:
And it’s a nice suggestion. I know 25’s got it. And I think Texas, the state of Texas has it. I believe the state of Florida has it. There’s parts of New York state that have it as well. But every AHJ is a little bit different, right? Unfortunately, but hey, what NFPA is doing is they’re putting a standard out there. Well, it’s not in the code, but it’s recommended, it’s in the annex.
So now beyond the physical tagging, we’re starting to see that within the digital space as well. So you can tag a system, whatever color code you want that goes to the AHJ, that’ll then roll into Compliance Engine, right? So it’ll digitally go up to the AHJ now. So it’s kind of on top of the actual color code tag. There’s actually digital tagging, which obviously that data’s going to flow faster up to the AHJ and the owner.
Shawn Mahoney:
And it helps them sort it easier, right? Instead of…
Drew Slocum:
Yeah, tremendously. Alright, we’ve got look up all my red tags.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah. Yeah, I mean, those were the big ones that I had. Obviously I could go on for days on changes in 72, but those are the big ones that I had as far as the 2022 edition. I can go over real quick, just like one or two of the big ones that we’re seeing in the 2025 edition, if you want to talk about those.
Drew Slocum:
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Let’s hit them quick.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah. So one that actually just–if anybody was at C&E, we have our technical session that happens on Thursday in which the entire membership who’s present gets to vote on certified amending motions, which is basically after the second draft goes through. You’re still able to put in a NIT MAM, which is a notice of intent to make a motion if it gets accepted. You get to make a motion in front of the whole membership, argue that you want your change to either happen or not to happen. So, this one happened in the second draft of 72. They added in, based on a fire protection research foundation report, a maximum ceiling height for smoke detectors using the methods that are provided in chapter 17. So they added in, that detectors, you’re allowed to use those methods up to 40 feet in height.
After 40 feet in height, you need to have some performance-based method for placing those detectors. There was a CAM on that to remove it, but it actually–CAM failed. So we’re still at–now, you can still use…basically it was ambiguous before now. But now, we’re going to have that 40 foot mark where it says, I can use the spacing requirements in chapter 17 up to 40 feet. After 40 feet, then I have to start looking at what that ceiling height’s going to do to my detector placement. Which is a good movement, getting rid of some ambiguity. So we see that change happening. Maybe not a huge deal for a lot of people, but adding that requirement in there is a good
Drew Slocum:
One. That’s great. And funny enough, I’m going to back up here. So I’m in Midtown Manhattan today, and I worked on the project at Moynihan Station, the new Penn Station. It was back in–it’s kind of some crazy systems there, but I know that the fire alarm, they had to go performance-based because, obviously, traditional detectors wouldn’t work in this huge atrium and it was above 40 feet. So I think they went UVIR, anyway, they got a performance-based system, did a whole study for it, but it was very interesting you bring that up. I literally, I’m looking down on it right now, but obviously they were ahead of…now it’s in the code for 25. So it’s interesting.
Shawn Mahoney:
It also brings up, I’ve had discussions with people about it now that it’s there, you probably don’t want to be putting a detector 40 feet in the air because you still have to go look…You still have to test it. So in a lot of cases, you’re still going to be using a beam detector or something in those large spaces. But I mean, you still have to look at the spacing requirements for a beam detector. So now, that’s all there I do want to note that if you did want to go look at that Research Foundation Project, there was some recommendations for reducing spacing as you get higher. That didn’t make it into 72. I wouldn’t be surprised if you see an adjustment for the next edition to start providing a little bit more requirements for those higher ceilings based on the Fire Protection Research Foundation report.
Drew Slocum:
That’s interesting. Yeah, I’m sure a lot of architects and FPPs, FPEs need to know that. So where did they do that testing?
Shawn Mahoney:
I’m pretty sure it was all modeling.
Drew Slocum:
Okay.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, and it was after X amount–I don’t know off the top of my head. It was after 10 feet, you reduce it as the height goes higher. That didn’t make it into the standard. But again, I wouldn’t be surprised if you see that making its way into the 2028 edition, adding it in there. But that was the contentious, that’s why there was a CAM on it. Because like, hey, there was still some other stuff. But again, that’s how the membership voted and the tech committee, you know, everyone felt that 40 feet was a good switchover spot.
Drew Slocum:
No, that’s great. I’ll look at, I’m heading into the train station in a few minutes here, so I’m going to be looking up to see what they got up, if I can even see ’em.
Shawn Mahoney:
You said, what did you say they were using? They were using video detection?
Drew Slocum:
They’re using video detection. It’s wild. So I was working on the sprinkler stuff, and–it’s this huge glass atrium, right? So it’s not a flat ceiling. It’s tough to collect the heat or smoke or whatever up there. So I think that’s why they want UVIR. But, weirdly enough, I worked their deluge systems, so they’re actually deluge systems with Viking VK 630. So traditionally enlisted, they throw like 26 feet, but they needed them to throw 36 feet, right? In order to cover all of the Moynihan/Penn Station area, to get the coverages on the floor the way that everything’s designed.
So literally, there’s these deluge systems that are, I think it’s cross zone detection on UVIR, and then it might be a manual thing by the FDNY. So literally the entire Moynihan Station floor, if there’s a fire, they’ll set off all the deluge systems. Yeah, it was really cool, really cool to work on. Again, I don’t know how it turned out in the end because I was just mainly in the design phase, but I know they have open head deluge systems because I saw them last time I was there.
Shawn Mahoney:
Wow, that’s cool. That’s the first time I’ve really heard of a daily system used indoors like that.
Drew Slocum:
Yeah. Yeah. And they’re remote resetting, so if there is a, whatever, false activation or whatever, the FDNY can key it in to shut off those deluge systems.
Shawn Mahoney:
Nice, that’s cool.
I bet there’s some level and all that stuff before those things activated.
Drew Slocum:
Yeah, it’s all performance-based, and again, it had to get special approval with port authority, FDNY. There was multiple FPE firms involved with this as well. So pretty cool stuff.
Well, Shawn, thanks again for coming on, and this is awesome. Yeah, I think you and I mentioned maybe getting together in the fall up at NFPA headquarters or something.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, definitely. I like being able to talk about all this stuff, so it’s nice that people are interested in hearing it. The other thing I wanted to add, too, is if you are listening and you’re really interested in the changes to a code or standard, I highly recommend checking out NFPA Link. Because, if it’s only for this one feature, if you’re in NFPA Link, you go to, first of all, it gives you access to all of NPA codes and standards from the get-go.
If you go to the 2022 edition of 72, you can look at all the changes that I just talked about. It’ll show you all in-line what the change indicators look like, whether the section’s new or changed or all that. You could actually click on the change and it’ll show you the past text right next to it, so you can see exactly what it used to look like.
And in most cases, we load a summary which talks about what the change actually was and gives you a little bit more detail. So even if it’s for one thing, just being able to see those changes in-line is huge. But again, we have enhanced content that gets added for all that stuff and so many more other features that NFPA Link provides. I was on paternity leave two years ago with my son, and that’s when they added that feature, and I came back and I was like, this is awesome. Just being able to see side by side is crazy. And then let alone being able to–for us to be able to go in and add–hey, this changed because of this, provide more detail or how this might affect you. I think it’s really important for people who are using the codes and standards to have.
Drew Slocum:
Yeah, NFPA Link’s, been a home run for my team and just in the industry in general. I think it was well-needed. And again, it’s going to keep progressing. I think Kyle and the team over there are doing a great job with it. I probably should get him on at some point too, to talk about it. He can join us in October.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, that’d be cool. I mean, it’s interesting too, to get Kyle…Kyle talking about the technical side on the software, which is also very different from technical side from us. People who put in the information, he gets to talk about, ‘This is what the platform can do,” And then we can say, yeah, this is what we get to do with it now. This is the kind of information I put in. Or even just direct navigation–them giving us the ability to make an entire situation. If you go into NFPA link, you could click on a hospital corridor and it’ll show you a picture of hospital corridor, and you can click on different parts of it, like maybe the horizontal exit, and it’ll provide you the requirements. It’ll provide you the links to the sections with those requirements for that exit.
So it’s really interesting, all the stuff we get to do with building those situations and figuring out what we want to put in those, which is really fun. We did a whole educational session at C&E kind of on that, talking about code and standard requirements, walking through a hospital, going through all those situations that we built, which was fun.
Drew Slocum:
Oh, that’s interesting. I didn’t know you guys did that, but moving from that kind of manual static version, right, to the more interactive.
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah. There’s tons of stuff. Tons of stuff we get do, and things are constantly upgrading, which is exciting on our end.
Drew Slocum:
Well, cool. Well, thanks again, Shawn. This is awesome. I’ll get this out in the next couple of weeks, I guess, where can everybody find you? NFPA.org, right?
Shawn Mahoney:
Yeah, NFPA.org for an NFPA stuff. If you’re interested in NFPA Link, nfpa.org/link. Probably the best way to find me is LinkedIn. Shoot me a message on LinkedIn if you’ve got any questions or smahoney@nfpa.org if you’ve got any questions, even if you’ve got a question where you think someone at NFPA can answer, I don’t know who, shoot it my way, I can always direct it in the right way. I always tell people that, just send me a message. smahoney@nfpa.org, feel free to send me an email with any of that stuff as well. send me a question.
Drew Slocum:
Thanks again, man, we’ll talk soon.
This has been episode 67 of The Fire Protection Podcast, powered by Inspect Point. I want to thank Shawn Mahoney again for coming on again. Hopefully, as we alluded to, we might be able to do this in person up in NFPA headquarters in Boston in the fall. Yeah, thanks for him coming on and NFPA supporting us and getting some information out to the industry. So, see you again soon. Thanks.
