Pat:

When you use the word “Authority” who specifically are you indicating is the authority? This may be where my perception of your meaning is not correct so thereby the answer I am giving does not make sense to you. I was taking it that because you were using NFPA documents that you were meaning that the NFPA thought their documents were accurate. In my thinking the NFPA is the authority for the publication of the documents, the documents in themselves have no authority, they are a publication of opinions.

Many people use the word “Authorities” to suggest a document has a greater meaning than was intended by the producer of the document. This I believe is semantics and does not clearly represent the intent of the producer of the document. If what you are indicating is that after a NFPA document is adopted into law it is authoritative, I would say to some extent it is based on how the law is written or other laws that may override the specific document. What I am suggesting is that even NFPA in the wording they use in document such as the NEC and the Life Safety Code, etc state to the user that the document is not intended to prevent the user of the system, methods, or devices of equivalent nature. It states the final decision as to equivalences is up to the authority having jurisdiction. This suggests to me the documents are not the only method to accomplish a task. All I have to do is demonstrate is that my idea is equal or better and I have met the intent of the document. In addition, if it is learned that the document is, as the NFPA calls it, silent on a specific area, that means that the document is not all encompassing and is not complete as to address all areas of protection needed.

In any way are you insinuating that authoritative has anything to do with accuracy or completeness?


Jim