Developing the next edition of NFPA 13
By Samuel S. Dannaway, PE,
President, S.S. Dannaway Associates, Inc., Honolulu
In this article I will go over NFPA’s standard development process and explain where the 2013 edition of NFPA 13 is in that process. In a later article, I will discuss some of the significant changes that are being proposed to NFPA 13.
Let me start with some basics. NFPA’s National Fire Codes is a collection of standards and codes. It also includes several documents which are designated as recommended practices or guides.
NFPA’s website defines a standard as: A document, the main text of which contains only mandatory provisions using the word "shall" to indicate requirements and which is in a form generally suitable for mandatory reference by another standard or code or for adoption into law.
NFPA defines a code as: A standard that is an extensive compilation of provisions covering broad subject matter or that is suitable for adoption into law independently of other codes and standards.
Simply stated, a standard tells us how to do something while a code tells when or where that something will be required. We recognize by its title that NFPA 13 The Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems is clearly a standard. It tells us how to install a sprinkler system, but it does not indicate where sprinkler systems are required. Those referring to the “NFPA 13 code” are exposing their lack of understanding of the difference between codes and standards.
One or more technical committees are responsible for codes and standards such as NFPA 13. The five technical committees responsible for NFPA 13 are:
1. Hanging and Bracing of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems
2. Private Water Supply Piping Systems
3. Residential Sprinkler Systems
4. Sprinkler System Discharge Criteria
5. Sprinkler System Installation Criteria
A sixth committee, the Technical Correlating Committee on Automatic Sprinkler Systems, is responsible for managing and coordinating the five technical committees.
It is a common misconception that members of the technical committees write the code (or standard). Technical committees and their members can and often do submit proposals for changing the standard, but most of their activity on the committee is spent considering the proposals for code revisions from the interested public.
NFPA’s codes and standards are considered consensus documents, as their development includes a significant effort to get broad agreement on document revisions. The work performed by technical committees is the first step in the consensus process. Consensus does not mean unanimous approval but approval by a super majority.
Another effort to promote consensus starts with the make-up of NFPA technical committees (TCs). NFPA TCs are appointed by the NFPA standards council, with the goal of getting a balance of interests. Committee members are classified in one the following interest categories:
• Insurance
• Consumer
• Enforcing authority
• Labor
• Installer/maintenance
• Manufacturer
• Applied research/testing lab
• User
• Special expert
A committee may contain up to 30 members, with no more than one-third of the members being from a single interest category.
The code development process can be broken down into five distinct steps:
Step 1. Call for proposals: The public is notified of the intent to issue a new document or to revise an existing NFPA code or standard and invited to submit code change proposals by a certain date. Any member of the public can submit a proposal. Proposals can be written and
submitted by e-mail or online at www.nfpa.org/categoryList.asp?categoryID=817.
Step 2. Report on Proposals (ROP): All proposals received by the deadline are considered by the TC at the ROP meeting. During this time the committee can also develop its own proposals. At the ROP meeting, approval of an action on a proposal is obtained by a simple majority vote. The TC can take one of the following actions on a proposal:
Accept the proposal with no modification.
Reject the proposal.
Accept in principal, which usually involves modifying the proposal for consistency or to achieve a better understanding of the intent.
Accept in part, in which only a portion of the proposal is accepted.
Accept in principal in part, in which the accepted part is modified
Any action other than accept must be provided with a written explanation of why the action was taken.
After the ROP meeting, the actions taken by the TC are formally balloted to the technical committee. Actions must receive a two-thirds majority to be approved. Actions and the reasons for actions for each proposal are then published in the Report on Proposals. This report can be downloaded at the NFPA website.
Step 3. Report on Comments (ROC): When the ROP document is published and available to the public, the process enters a 60-day comment stage. During this time, the public can comment in writing on any proposal. It is noted that comments during this step may not include new proposals; i.e., new material. All comments must be related to a proposal in the ROP. All comments received by the deadline are considered at the second meeting of the TC, the ROC Meeting. As with the ROP, each comment is voted on at the meeting and formally balloted to each committee member after the meeting.
The results of the formal ballot are published in a second document called the Report on Comments (ROC), which, like the ROP, is posted for public review.
Step 4. Association (NFPA) technical meeting: After the required review time the document is brought up for acceptance at the association technical meeting held at the NFPA Conference & Expo each June. Here the document revisions can be further debated. Anyone wishing to submit a motion must provide the NFPA standards council with a Notice of Intent to Make a Motion (NITMAM). Allowable motions include motions to accept proposals and comments in whole or in part as submitted or as modified by a technical committee action. Motions are also available to reject an accepted comment in whole or part. Also, a motion can be made to return an entire technical committee report or a portion of the report to the technical committee for further study. You do not have to be a member to make a motion or speak in support or against a motion, but you do have to be an NFPA member for at least 180 days before the meeting in order to be allowed to vote. The votes on motions are approved or rejected based on a simple majority vote.
Step 5. Standards Council issuance: The court of last resort, after the Association technical meeting, the NFPA Standards Council meets to hear appeals to any action on a document during the process. Documents clearing this hurdle will be issued by the Standards Council and will become effective 20 days after the date of issuance.
NFPA 13 is currently in Step 2 of the process. The various committees have held their ROP meeting and are awaiting the formal ballot. A condensed version of the revision cycle schedule for NFPA 13 next edition is as follows:
Notification of intent to enter the revision cycle, 07/09/2010
ROP proposal closing date, 11/23/2010
ROP published and posted, 06/24/2011
Closing date for comments on the ROP, 08/30/2011
ROC published and posted, 02/24/2012
NITMAM closing date, 04/06/2012
Association meeting, 06/15-16/2012
Issuance of documents by Standards Council, 07/26/2012
Based on this schedule the next period for public input will occur on June 24, when the ROP is posted. Check out the ROP at NFPA’s website. Get involved and make a comment. Sometime in August, the 2013 edition of NFPA 13 will become effective, and it will be a document which you helped write.
Samuel S. Dannaway, PE, is a registered fire protection engineer and mechanical engineer and past president and a Fellow of the Society of Fire Protection Engineers. He is president of S. S. Dannaway Associates, Inc. He can be reached via email at SDannaway@ssdafire.com.