Comments Wanted on NFPA Security Standards
December 14, 2011
The APPA Code Advocacy Task Force will be preparing proposals for new safety concepts for the 2014 editions of the following two related documents issued by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA):
- NFPA 730 - Guide on Premises Security. This guide describes construction, protection, occupancy features, and practices intended to reduce security vulnerabilities to life and property.
- NFPA 731 - Standard for the Installation of Electronic Premises Security Systems. This standard covers the application, location, installation, performance, testing, and maintenance of electronic premises security systems and their components.
Comments are due to NFPA by January 4, 2012. APPA, the association of higher education facilities professionals, encourages NACUBO members with any suggestions for safety or product performance concepts that should be included in these documents to communicate with APPA's Task Force (see contact information below) as soon as possible.
As has been discussed in APPA's Code Talker column (Facilities Manager, May-June 2011) these are the most practical documents for campus security for higher education. There are many campus security documents that are being developed by ad hoc committees throughout the U.S., but only NFPA 730 and 731 have been developed according to a process recognized by the American National Standards Institute.
Over the past two years, APPA's Code Advocacy Task Force has had success in making changes to these documents. Prospective concepts for the 2014 revision being developed by the Code Advocacy Task Force will take into consideration recent leading practices that appear in other related documents:
- A Risk Analysis Standard for Natural and Man‐Made Hazards to Higher Education Institutions (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)
- Societal Security ISO/223 (International Standards Organization)
- NFPA 1600 Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management and Business Continuity Programs (National Fire Protection Association)
Managing large, complex, capital-intensive educational facility infrastructure assets with unique architectural and social identities is different from managing other asset classes. Differences in everything from department culture to annual facility use patterns mean that facility managers cannot implement the same safety approaches in all buildings. Approaches must be scaled and tailored to the occupancy type and informed by the interconnectedness and the specifics of a given facility.
The individuals listed below are leading this effort for APPA. They would appreciate input from campuses of all types and can also assist you in obtaining copies of NFPA 730 and/or 731 if needed. They are willing to provide assistance if your institution would like to submit a proposal directly to NFPA.
Richard J. Davis, P.E., J.D.
The Evergreen State College
Michael A. Anthony, P.E.
University of Michigan
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
- NACUBO Expresses Concerns with ED Proposal to Expand Federal Financial Responsibility Rules
- IRS Proposes Modifications to 1098-T Reporting
- ED Policy to Require Annual Student Aid Compliance Audits Beginning FY17
- 2016 Intermediate Accounting and Reporting Fall
October 24-25, 2016
- ON-DEMAND: The CBO's Role in Diversity and Inclusion on Campus
- ON-DEMAND: The Clery Act: Strategic Planning to Mitigate Institutional Risk
- ON-DEMAND: Title IX: Key Issues Surrounding Institutional Compliance
- ON-DEMAND: NACUBO Live! Higher Education Accounting Forum
- ON-DEMAND: Responsibility Center Management: Two Different Perspectives