Question:
I am a fire inspector employed by a municipal fire department serving a population of 130,000. I have been requested to research other fire departments criteria for the receipt of fire alarms and response to the same. Currently in discussion within our Fire Prevention Bureau are the following topics: 1. If a non-monitored fire alarm system activates (either by automatic detection, manual pull or water flow) is the facility required to notify the fire department that the alarm is sounding? Note: the Uniform Fire Code requires that owners, operators and occupants notify the fire department upon discovery of a fire, smoke or the release of a flammable liquid or hazardous material. The code does not specifically identify a requirement to notify the fire department when a fire alarm system activates (except when monitoring is required such as automatic sprinkler systems with 100 or more sprinkler heads) 2. Is it appropriate (acceptable) to allow maintenance or security personnel to investigate the cause of the alarm to determine if there really is a fire PRIOR to notifying the fire department? This does not happen concurrent to fire department notification, this occurs BEFORE fire department notification. Think of it as extreme alarm verification. Note: In our state, legislation was proposed to require every central station to verify an actual fire condition before dispatching the fire department. This legislation failed. 3. Do you feel that a full response (multiple engines, ladder truck, battalion chief) to a fire alarm system activation is often unnecessary given the large number of non-fire / false alarm activation's? Does the potential benefit outweigh the risks of response? My personal opinion is; all fire alarm activation's (excluding most supervisory/trouble) signals must be reported to the fire department and a response is required. Then, while the fire department is enroute, facilities with trained loss prevention, security or engineering staff may investigate and report findings to the responding fire department prior to arrival. This may assist in proper apparatus placement, the number of resources required and ensure that the system is properly restored in a "normal" condition. Granted, the level of the response by the fire department may be configured around circumstances such as type of occupancy, time of day or prior false alarm history however, you can only make this determination ONCE the fire department has been notified. Consider that many of these early warning fire alarm systems have been required to be installed in assembly, educational, institutional, residential, large mercantile or high rise occupancies. Should the fire service delay or reduce the level of protection provided (responding equipment) to an occupancy just because a built-in fire protection system has been installed? Should all protected premises suffer the consequences because, in general, many alarms are not actual fires? If so, what's the incentive?

Answer: Q: 1. If a non-monitored fire alarm system activates (either by automatic detection, manual pull or water flow) is the facility required to notify the fire department that the alarm is sounding?

A: Here I don't believe there is any rule mandating notification for alarm activation, unless the system is monitored. In other words, if a water gong starts ringing and there is no other alarm in the building, there's no requirement that the FD be notified. (I have to say, though, that common sense should dictate that the FD be called to a fire alarm activation, unless it's a known false alarm.) Q: Note: the Uniform Fire Code requires that owners, operators and occupants notify the fire department upon discovery of a fire, smoke or the release of a flammable liquid or hazardous material. The code does not specifically identify a requirement to notify the fire department when a fire alarm system activates (except when monitoring is required such as automatic sprinkler systems with 100 or more sprinkler heads)

A: A neighboring FD had a small fire in the roof/ceiling area of a facility that retailed paint and wallpaper, and on premises was a paint plant. The small ceiling fire went unreported, and was put out by employees. Well, it wasn't all the way out, and it rekindled into a MAJOR fire. There were no less than seven aerials operating there, one of which was ours. THere was mutual aid from all over the place, and firefighters were on the scene for 33 hours! The whole facility is a loss, and I believe they're still fighting over whether the insurance will pay or not. Q: 2. Is it appropriate (acceptable) to allow maintenance or security personnel to investigate the cause of the alarm to determine if there really is a fire PRIOR to notifying the fire department? This does not happen concurrent to fire department notification, this occurs BEFORE fire department notification. Think of it as extreme alarm verification.

A: As long as the entity whose fire alarm is not being responded to knows and is comfortable with the delay in response, as well as the possibility that the maintenance workers or security people may be overcome by fumes/heat/etc. and not be able to alert the FD at all. I would also make sure their insurance provider knows this, because I'll bet the rates are different than where an automatic system is in place. Q: Note: In our state, legislation was proposed to require every central station to verify an actual fire condition before dispatching the fire department. This legislation failed. 3. Do you feel that a full response (multiple engines, ladder truck, battalion chief) to a fire alarm system activation is often unnecessary given the large number of non-fire / false alarm activation's? Does the potential benefit outweigh the risks of response?

A: I think full response is often unneccessary (to answer your question), but I also think an alarm should be responded to until you know it's not a fire. Repeat false alarms should get a one-truck response, and the real pain-in-the-butt, twice-a-day-with-no-attempt-to-fix-the-damn-thing false arms should get one engine company, code 2. There's no reason to race to these. The insurance provider should also be notified that due to the large number of false alarms versus the risks of responding a full box, response to this facility will not be the full complement, unless the one responding unit feels the need for it. But, where you're going with this, let me say that yes, ALL alarms should get some kind of FD response.