Finding codes and standards
However, a number of widely
Research Use Only
In general,
Direct copying and pasting of the codes or standards generally fall under protected copyrights, and can only...
Read the full report here
Free Online NFPA and IBC Codes and Standards
Brian Rhodes
Nov 28, 2016U
Undisclosed #1
Nov 29, 2016Thanks!
UI
Undisclosed Integrator #2
Nov 29, 2016Are you guys like hacking my brain?? It seems every time I have a question about something, it pops up on IPVM. I appreciate all you guys do to keep us informed. Thanks!
KL
Keefe Lovgren
Nov 29, 2016great source! Thank you Brian!
UI
Undisclosed Integrator #3
Dec 01, 2016Excellent reference. Thank you!
Christopher Freeman
Dec 01, 2016Just one question
How can you charge me or the AHJ's 1200-1800.00 for this same option as a NFPA Member , but still give this out for Free. ?
something seems out of place here.
I had AHJ's say the same thing to me about this.
sS
sundar Subramanian
Jan 03, 2017Brian,
i have registered myself in NFPA website. Now do i need to compulsory pay membership to download the free content for safety codes (which you are talking here) ?
Brian Rhodes
Jan 03, 2017If you want to download codes, you need to buy them and they aren't free. From above:
In general, free online code resources are read-only and users are not able to download, notate, or print copies for offline circulation. If users want this, then standards and codes are available for purchase, often at prices ranging from ~$100 for a single standard to upwards of $5000 for a full set of comprehensive codes. For example, NFPA explains:
"These online documents are "read-only" - they cannot be downloaded or printed, because NFPA relies on the revenues from individuals who purchase copies of these documents to fund our mission."
Yasir Jahangir
Dec 27, 2017thanks
Jerry Wilkins
Jun 27, 2018You should consider reviewing NFPA-3000. It is not free however it provides a comprehensive framework to plan for, respond to and recover from a hostile event. Some will argue it creates a Best Practice or Standard of Care for All businesses to have ASHER program.
Christopher Moore
Jul 09, 2018Don't forget about NFPA 731
Standard for the Installation of Electronic Premises Security Systems
Tim Sutton
Feb 14, 2019The NFPA should leave security to the security professionals and security professional organizations such as ASIS International and their Standards & Guidelines Commission.
Brian Rhodes
Feb 14, 2019In fairness to NFPA, the weak recognition of standards like 731 - Electronic Premises Security Systems in security shows that unless codified (ie: NFPA 101), the organization does not have much influence.
However, would ASIS standards do much better unless codified? Who enforces it in the field?
Jerry Wilkins
Feb 14, 2019Brian, no doubt enforcement is an issue from a legal standpoint however when recognized organizations like ASIS, ANSI or NFPA create guidance documents they could be considered a "standards of care" or "industry best practice". Failure to follow "industry best practice" can create a liability nightmare, not to mention cost lives and property. What caused me to respond is a simple fact. We have been living with Active Shooter/Killer events in our schools, houses of worship and commercial work space for over 20 years. The document produced by NFPA is the first comprehensive road-map for creating a solid response plan. Just my opinion.
JH
John Honovich
Feb 14, 2019ASIS, ANSI or NFPA create guidance documents they could be considered a "standards of care" or "industry best practice". Failure to follow "industry best practice" can create a liability nightmare, not to mention cost lives and property. [emphasis added]
This is FUD unless you have some concrete examples of actual litigation coming from not following these 'documents'. Do you?
Jerry Wilkins
Feb 14, 2019NFPA-3000 (PS) was just released in May of last year, it should be noted that it is now a part of the new PASS guidelines release in December. John, I had to look up FUD, now that I know what that means I believe you are missing my point. Liability or no liability, Parkland is an horrific example of a failure to plan! The 1200 building, where the children were killed, had technology in place and protocols that had not been practiced because they assumed, "it couldn't happen here". One child being killed or injured is unacceptable! I believe preparation build resilience. Monthly Fire drills are required in most school district however the last fatal fire in a US occurred in 1958. Is that a result of better construction, better fire detection systems or better policies and procedures... you be the judge. I do not have an example of a current liability case that utilizes the best practices contained in NFPA-3000 but, it is my opinion that the lack of planning on the school districts part resulted in a failure to leverage the technology in-place causing the scene not to be classified as "cold" for almost 60 minutes. Simple stated, EMS was not allowed to enter the building for almost an hour because it was not known that the shooter had left 7 minutes and 21 seconds after the first round was fired. I have a 3 year old grandson, every time I hear about one of these horrific events all I can think about is my little boy! If pointing out the importance of trying to improve the outcomes of these events by following the available regulatory guidance puts me in the FUD category I will accept that.
Tim Sutton
Feb 15, 2019Jerry, Parkland failed long before the failure to plan for an incident and understanding incident response. They failed at the most basic responsibility of securing the premises. The U.S. Department of Justice put out a document titled "The Appropriate and Effective Use of Security Technologies in Schools a Guide for Schools and Law Enforcement Agencies" way back in September, 1999.(https://www.ncjrs.gov/school/state.html). They put out an updated second version in 2015. Would this not be considered a best practice that should have been followed by Parkland? The most basic access control policies were not followed.
The NFPA's document deals with an active shooter more from an emergency management perspective as opposed to security. The fire department lives and breathes under NIMS and the IC structure. ASIS is currently writing an Active Assailant Annex to be included in the updated Work Place Violence Prevention and Intervention Standard.
Jerry Wilkins
Feb 15, 2019Tim,
Since we have not been able to figure out how to stop these events we must figure our how to better respond and minimize the impact. Unfortunately, impact equals body count! I believe the reason NFPA produced NFPA-3000(PS) stems from the horrific outcomes we have seen in the past events. I am looking forward to reading the ASIS Active Assailant Annex.
Jerry Wilkins
Feb 14, 2019With all due respect I strongly disagree. The Columbine school shooting occurred 20 years ago. The anniversary of Parkland is today. NFPA-3000 (PS) is the first comprehensive guide to plan for, respond to and recover from an ASE or as they refer to it, a Hostile Event. Our industry has a strong understanding of how to deter and detect however very few folks in our industry discuss what to do if you go "Right of Boom". If you have not read NFPA-3000 (PS), I encourage you to read it. You will find terms like NIMS, ICS, Cold/Warm/Hot zones, TECC/TCCC and the importance of a community wide approach to critical incident response. It talks about the importance of creating EOP's and Annex's for all known "All Hazard Events" not just active shooter. No disrespect to ASIS but if you look at the CPP® or PSP® curriculum they contain very little training on how to operationalize technology to improve outcome when bad things happen. Additionally NFPA has been involved in many aspects of security. If you look at door hardware as a critical component of access control, I think you would agree, security is not new to NFPA. I could go on and on about this however I encourage you to read the ASHER Standard it is well written and comprehensive. If you would like to discuss this feel free to give me a call.
Jerry G Wilkins, PSP®
410-430-1485
Tim Sutton
Feb 15, 2019This is not an NFPA document that treads into a 100% security environment such as access control, video surveillance, alarm, and security operations. It stays in the emergency management realm of an event where they are strong, knowledgeable, and welcomed.
I feel the NFPA overstepped in their NFPA 730 Guide for Premise Security and NFPA 731 Standard for the installation of Premises Security. Those are the flames that burn my a$$.
Tim Sutton CPP®, CHPA®
Jerry Wilkins
Feb 15, 2019Tim,
This is a "Should" statement in NFPA-3000(PS):
A.9.4.1 Facilities should consider adding new technology to
increase their preparedness for active shooter/hostile event
incidents. This could include, but is not limited to, the following:
(1) Increased surveillance, including video
(2) Shooter detection systems
(3) Mass notification software
(4) Increased radio frequency identification badging
(5)Access control software
For example, facilities should explore systems that can
enhance detection and response capabilities in order to
address threats faster and move people to safer locations.
If you combine technology in the emergency response protocol you will save lives! If we want to help make our clients safer we must understand the response "best practices" so we can leverage/apply technology to improve outcomes. Below is a NFPA-3000 "Shall" statement:
6.6 Incident Management. An ASHER program shall have an
incident command structure that is consistent with the
National Incident Management System (NIMS).
In John's response to me he made reference to Fear uncertainty and doubt (FUD) which has very negative connotations. I believe in many, if not most of the Active Shooter Events that have occurred in this country, lives could have been save thru the situational awareness available from Video, lock-down capability available in Access Control and Alerting available in Mass Notification. Unless and until we (our industry) learns how to weaponize technology when we go "Right of Boom" First Responders will continue to walk into Critical Incidents without the information/situational awareness that could mean the difference between life and death. Final thought, the Safe School Grants require the use of NIMS in the EOP process.
New discussion
Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.
Newest discussions