NFPA Members Vote Overwhelmingly to Accept Updated Language on Fire Alarm Monitoring

June 14, 2018
by Tim A. Scally
Reposted with permission of SDM

View article on SDM Website

This afternoon, at the annual NFPA Conference & Expo held in Las Vegas, members voted 304 to 128 to accept the updated language proposed for the 2019 Edition of NFPA 72.

The change to the code has a direct impact on alarm companies and monitoring stations because it involves where and how fire alarm monitoring is provided to commercial locations.

The main point of contention in this language is Section 26.5.3 of the code, which specifies the requirements for supervising station alarm “facilities.” A certified amending motion (CAM) was presented on the floor to accept “Public Input 6” that specifically revises 26.5.3.1.3. This language was intended to clarify the position that listed central stations are able to provide remote station service if that is the level of service desired. Specifically, within the proposed final edition is a paragraph that reads:

26.5.3.1.3 Alarm, supervisory and trouble signals shall be permitted to be received at a listed central supervising station.

This language — which was submitted by Rick Simpson, vice president of technical services at Vector Security and chair of The Monitoring Association’s (TMA) Standards Committee, and was voted in favor of — changes the original language by striking out the introductory words, “Where permitted by the authority having jurisdiction…”

Many people spoke in favor including Ivan Spector, TMA president; Jay Hauhn, TMA executive director and CEO; Patrick Egan, founder of Select Security; Kevin Lehan, public relations manager, EMERgency 24; and a representative from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

The reason this language matters is that many in the industry believe the code should reflect that a facility meeting the stringent central station listing requirements automatically meets the lessor remote station facility standards. According to ESA, this updated language will prevent a central station from arbitrarily being denied recognition as a remote station, as has happened in Schaumburg, Ill. (www.SDMmag.com/illinois-esa-schaumburg), where in 2016 the city passed a law requiring any new alarm installation for commercial fire in Schaumburg to be monitored by Northwest Central Dispatch, which is the 911 center for 10 nearby communities.

Kevin Lehan, former executive director of the Illinois Electronic Security Association (IESA), said the Schaumburg law would be tantamount to the government confiscating customers from private alarm companies.

In areas where this practice is occurring, ESA reported, the AHJ designates a single remote station, typically operated by or in partnership with the AHJ itself, as “approved” under the code. The AHJ then rejects the use of all other forms of private fire alarm monitoring, including monitoring via a NRTL-listed central station. This eliminates all private competition and leaves a government entity, who is also the AHJ, as the sole provider of fire alarm monitoring services.

Since the code revision process is a three-year cycle, correcting this now rather than pushing it to the 2022 cycle prevents potentially adverse language from being in effect for nearly a decade.

Not everyone agrees with this take, however. Some, according to ESA, believe the proposed language in the CAM was poorly worded, possibly in the wrong location, and possibly does not address other subsections in the same section that could then cause issues with interpretation. Some subject matter experts said, even before the vote, that the proposed language update should be rejected this cycle in favor of building a consensus on modifying the code in the next cycle to address all the relevant sections that would apply. Others opposed modifying a national code for solving what they deemed a local issue.

Roy Pollack, an SDM columnist and ESA representative on the NFPA technical committee, said before the vote, “I will be attending the NFPA technical committee session in Las Vegas and casting my vote against the CAM. I personally have experience in the fire service, the alarm industry and on several industry committees and do not feel that the way the CAM is written is in the best interest of anyone but a select few. While I understand and agree with the underlying issue, I believe that the proposed language is poorly written, in the wrong place and does not address other sections of the code, thereby potentially causing confusion and conflict. The issue needs to be thoroughly discussed and reviewed by both the ESA and TMA and a comprehensive public comment submitted during the next cycle of the code for consideration.”

While ESA is taking a more neutral approach, attempting to educate the industry about the issue, TMA has been open in its support of changing the language to the CAM.

According to TMA, it was involved in an effort to overturn the NFPA language in 2016 when it was first modified to include the controversial language, but it was unsuccessful. TMA supports changing the language this year, fearing that the language as it stood before the vote would have caused alarm companies to be subject to a loss of customers because fire departments will commence monitoring themselves.

“What is happening,” said Jay Hauhn, executive director, TMA, “is that municipalities are not allowing NRTL-listed central stations to monitor fire alarms, and yet they allow the use of something called remote station. The standards to be a remote station are incredibly lax.”

“Where permitted by the authority having jurisdiction” language in the code, Hauhn said, “is very common. However, using it to block an entire class of service is unprecedented, inappropriate and makes it easier for municipalities to prohibit NRTL-listed central stations from monitoring fire alarms. We’ve been monitoring fire systems safely and effectively for 100 years.”

Before the vote, Hauhn said this proposed change to strike out AHJ language was being spun by opponents as usurping AHJ authority, but contends that the proposed change “takes unfair language out of the fire code, given the way it was being used.”

Following the vote, Hauhn told SDM that this vote goes a long way in protecting a consumer’s right to select a NRTL-listed central station of their choice. “Many municipalities will still write their own fire code that will counteract the action we just took with NFPA 72 — municipalities are allowed to pass their own fire ordinances in many states,” he said. “In other states, a municipality cannot write a fire code that conflicts with the code at the state level; so in those municipalities where the state levels are overriding, it means a lot.  When a municipality does consider enacting an ordinance that takes away the rights of consumers to use a NRTL-listed facility, we will review it and hopefully work with the municipality to implement a fair ordinance.”

Hauhn said TMA would contest that when it happens.

“This is not an affront to the fire services,” Hauhn added. “The entire monitoring industry, everybody in the fire protection business, totally respects what those in public safety and the fire services do to protect the community. This was simply an action to do away with an inequity and make things fair.”

State Farm’s Joe Miskulin, Valued TMA Volunteer and Contributor, to Retire

CaptureJoe Miskulin, long-time manager of State Farm Insurance’s proprietary central station, announced he will retire on June 29. Miskulin, who has been with State Farm for nearly 40 years, is one of the founding members of the TMA Proprietary Council, which started in 1999 with a change in the association’s bylaws permitting not-for-profit central stations to become regular members. He has served as a member of the TMA Board of Directors and as co-chair of the TMA Education Committee and was instrumental in planning the annual Fall Operations Management Seminar.

“State Farm was the first proprietary central station voted into the association, so I had a front row seat into the birth and growth of the CSAA Proprietary Council, of which I was honored to serve as president for several years,” said Miskulin. “My friendship with Pam Petrow introduced me to the Education Committee, which I had the pleasure of chairing for 6 years. That led to chairing the Operation Track of ESX, which introduced me to the real movers and shakers of our industry, who served as mentors to me throughout my career. For those who volunteered to make our annual Fall Operation Management meetings the huge success that they are, I am forever grateful.”

For his many valuable contributions to TMA and the industry, Miskulin received the TMA President’s Award in 2016. “The highlight of my professional career has been my association with the outstanding folks in the alarm industry,” said Miskulin. “I was humbled to be honored with the CSAA President’s Award in 2016, and leave knowing that our association is in great hands.”

Product iQ: UL’s Next-Generation Online Certification Directory

UL LOGOUL is pleased to announce the availability of Product iQ, a certifications platform that marries the longstanding UL certification data with the intuitive design and user-friendliness of a modern search engine.

UL is committed to ongoing digital transformation across the enterprise. Product iQ is one of several initiatives designed to meet the growing demands of a digital world. Product iQ is designed to create new value, support transformation and evolve with changing needs.

Product iQ is built on a modern digital platform with a streamlined user interface and a fast, robust search capability. Features such as guided keyword search, search refinement and the ability to email search results improve the user experience. Additionally, a new, premium subscription offering allows users to purchase access to enhanced tools: saved searches, tagging and confirmation letters.

Product iQ also enables our customers to promote and differentiate their products and company through the use of digital media services and targeted email campaigns. Platform analytics can help our customers connect with other UL customers and provide transparency to industry and platform trends.

Access to UL’s certification information will always be free. Upon registration, users access exactly the same certification information as in the old platform at no cost. Upgrade to a premium subscription is available for those interested in the more advanced tools.

The platform technology underlying Product iQ was selected based on its ability to expand and grow with the information needs of UL’s stakeholders and customers. It is UL’s vision to use this platform to create premium value for UL clients and stakeholders by helping them both identify safer, more compliant products and services, and help them promote the same to potential buyers.

Product iQ will be available concurrently to the original Online Certifications Directory (OCD) for some time to allow users to register and learn the new platform. The OCD will be decommissioned later in 2018 and its links will be redirected to the new Product iQ platform.

For more information and account registration, visit https://iq.ulprospector.com/info.