NFPA Code Question

Panel location must be accessable if you have a remote to reset panel with out having to go up into attic that would meet code if you must go up into the attic to reset that would not be acceptable/ Your right class b does not need a return obiously the individual ding the inspection doesnot know what he is looking at unless a local code would require class a loops.

Thanks Nick, It is a residential home alarm (Networx 6) with smoke detectors wired in. No need to access the panel. The keypads are the remotes. I know that I would not have tagged for this. Allan

While I wouldn't place a FACP in an attic, as long as it's accessible (per code description) and the environment is controlled (not too hot/cold/humid to meet the panel specs) it should be ok.

There's no need for a return loop on a Class A loop.

What kind of attic are we talking about here? Is it insulated, finished, heated, etc? Can you stand up in there? Or is it like the ones we have with a 4 in 12 max pitch where the poor service tech has to crawl up there in 150 degree heat to service the panel? How do your batteries and circuit boards hold up? js

NFPA 70-2002

110.3(B) Installation and Use. Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.

NFPA 72-2002

4=2E4.4 Performance and Limitations. 4=2E4.4.1 Voltage, Temperature, and Humidity Variation. Equipment shall be designed so that it is capable of performing its intended functions under the following conditions: (1) At 85 percent and at 110 percent of the nameplate primary (main) and secondary (standby) input voltage(s) (2) At ambient temperatures of 0=B0C (32=B0F) and 49=B0C (120=B0F) (3) At a relative humidity of 85 percent and an ambient temperature of 30=B0C (86=B0F)

NFPA 72-2002

4=2E4.5 Protection of Fire Alarm Control Unit(s). In areas that are not continuously occupied, automatic smoke detection shall be provided at the location of each fire alarm control unit(s) to provide notification of fire at that location. Exception: Where ambient conditions prohibit installation of automatic smoke detection, automatic heat detection shall be permitted.

NFPA 72-2002

5=2E7.1.8* Unless specifically designed and listed for the expected conditions, smoke detectors shall not be installed if any of the following ambient conditions exist: (1) Temperature below 0=B0C (32=B0F) (2) Temperature above 38=B0C (100=B0F) (3) Relative humidity above 93 percent (4) Air velocity greater than 1.5 m/sec (300 ft/min)

Attics are notoriously hot here. This house is a three story home in West University Place, a real upper class, yuppie neighborhood. Its new construction, you can stand in the attic w/ no problem and the undlayment for the roof is a material called "Cool Ply". The attics in homes with the Cool Ply do not really get too hot. The panel is at the head of the attic stairway so you don't have to actually go into the attic to access it, just stand on the stairs.

I don't think it is a code violation. I would not normally install a panel in an unfinished attic such as this, but other than a diminished battery life, I don't see any real problem.

Thanks Mike.

As long as the attic does not exceed the temp, humidty etc in chart some attics do some do not and he has a heat detector covering the panel then the installation would pass. however even a panel mounted in a warehouse could concivably be subjected to several days below zero.Every year. which is why you want it in the heated office if it has one but some do not. Since this is a residential install many times there never even inspected many times it is a judgement call because the idea location is not 100% obtainable.

It is basically the same problem with electrical load centers.(breaker Panel) one place they specifically say it can not be mounted is over a sink or toilet or in a closet and you must maintain 3 ft of clearance around the panel. etc. You would not install a load center in an attic but if it was supplying HVAC equiptment in the attic a small load center could be mountd if the temp humidity chart in NEC is followed.

You guys inspect residential fire? The only residential fire stuff that gets inspected here are firesprinklers.

| > What kind of attic are we talking about here? Is it insulated, finished, | > heated, etc? Can you stand up in there? Or is it like the ones we have | > with | > a 4 in 12 max pitch where the poor service tech has to crawl up there in | > 150 | > degree heat to service the panel? How do your batteries and circuit boards | > hold up? | > js | >

| >

| |

Here in MI they inspect our residential fire.

Even if we are not primary we still have to pull a permit.

Crash Gord> You guys inspect residential fire? The only residential fire stuff that gets

These are minimum requirements for the equipment. They don't have anything=

to do with the installation, since a manufacturer could choose to exceed these minimum requirements.

The system in question is a residential system. This requirement does not apply here.

Again, a smoke detector is not required for equipment protection in a residential system. These requirements are irrelevant.

One section you neglected to mention is NEC section 110.26, relating to spaces around electrical equipment.

Generally, there is a working space requirement of 3 feet in front of the equipment, which can be waived by special permission for low voltage equipment. But there is also a "dedicated equipment space" requirement, which requires a clear space in front of the equipment that extends from the floor to 6 feet above the equipment or the structural ceiling, whichever is less. This requirement could give an inspector grounds to reject a panel installed in an attic.

The temperature specs for this panel are 32 degrees to 120 degrees Fahrenheit,, which might be a problem for some attics. Panels must be installed per the manufacturer's specs.

Personally, every time I see a panel installed in an attic or above a drop ceiling, I figure the installer is a complete asshole, because he's forgotten that people will have to work on that system, and he's too goddamn lazy to put the panel in an accessible location. So I'm on the electrical inspector's side: move the panel! Of course, the inspector is an idiot when he starts talking about return loops on two-wire smoke detector loops.

Inspectors may think they're God, but they're not. They're paid to enforce=

code, not make up their own code as they go along. The installer should have asked the inspector to cite the code sections that support his decision.=20

- badenov

You're right. How's this: NFPA 72-2002

4=2E4.4.2.4 Equipment shall be installed in locations where conditions do not exceed the voltage, temperature, and humidity limits specified in 4=2E4.4.1. Exception: Equipment specifically listed for use in locations where conditions can exceed the upper and lower limits specified in 4.4.4.1 shall be permitted.

The requirements do apply if the fire alarm system is used to meet the minimum requirements of the building code (see chapter 11). If this system is installed in addition to smoke alarms, the requirements would not apply.

Good point.

More like demigod or godlike. Unfortunately the inspector has the upper hand in many cases. One may win the war and loose the battle (certificate of occupancy).

Mike

If I read you correctly, you are saying that in a household fire alarm system that does not use 120VAC smoke alarms, a smoke detector must be used to protect the control panel. But if 120VAC smoke alarms are installed and system smoke detectors are also installed, then a smoke detector is not required at the control panel. I think you're wrong on this one. The smoke detector at the panel is not required in a household fire alarm system.

NFPA 72 - 11.1.4 states: "The requirements of Chapter 4 through Chapter 9 shall not apply unless otherwise indicated." You've cited a panel protection requirement from Chapter 4. I do not see this requirement in Chapter 11. Have I missed it?

Say, you're not a building inspector, are you? :-)

- badenov

See NFPA 72 Chapter 11.3.2 and A.11.3.2.

Where the building code requires smoke detection in a one or two family dwelling, one of the following two methods are allowed:

1) Self-contained smoke alarm(s) installed in sleeping rooms and outside sleeping rooms and on each additional level within the dwelling or;

2) A system of smoke detector(s) installed in sleeping rooms and outside sleeping rooms and on each additional level within the dwelling.

Item number 2 requires a control panel, which in turn requires a smoke detector to supervise the its location.

No. As much as I'd like to be a building inspector, I can't. My parents are still married :)

Mike

err... scratch that, reverse it. Bad my.

How did this resolve?

Bob

I have not been back, but on our first hot day, I will measure the temperature in the attic. If it is under 120, I will green tag the panel. If it is 120 or higher, I'll drop the panel down into the utility room and then green tag it. The owner prefers it be taken out of the attic. Allan

I disagree. You're cit "The requirements of this chapter shall apply to fire alarm systems, equipment, and components addressed in Chapter 5 through Chapter 10."

Household fire alarm systems are covered by Chapter 11. Your requirement doesn't apply. If it did, what other Chapter 4 requirements should also apply? All of them?

I understand your point of view: if a system uses smoke alarms, they will not all be disabled by a single fire, but if a system depends on a single control panel, a single fire at the control panel could wipe out the entire system. Probably this is something that should be addressed during the next code development cycle.

Personally, I think it's a bit wasteful to put a smoke detector inside a small residential closet. I think 4.4.5, and any future Chapter 11 section, should permit the use of a rate of rise detector instead of a smoke detector, under all conditions. So far as I know, no fire alarm control panel has ever been disabled by smoke. :-)

- badenov

Admittedly, the thread supporting my statement is disjointed. Nonetheless, the thread exists (at least in my tiny little brain).

The requirement to install a smoke detector to "protect" control equipment was initially removed in the 2007 code cycle. At the last minute the requirement was reinstated with the intent to eventually remove it once the requirement is added to the IBC/IFC. Likewise for the single manual box requirement.

I know, it sounds silly, however, Annex A indicates that anecdotal evidence supports the requirement. Smoke detection vs. heat detection to ensure action is taken before the control is incapacitated by fire. While the rule requires a smoke detector, the exception allows a heat detector to be used.

Mike

-^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

-||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

Remember this one??????