Maryland’s Two Codes: Building Code or NFPA 1 and 101?

Maryland applies both codes to the same building: the Maryland Building Performance Standards (MBPS), built on the 2021 International Building Code (IBC), govern the design through the county or municipal building permit, and the State Fire Prevention Code (SFPC), built on National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1, Fire Code, and NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, in their 2024 editions, applies to the same building through the fire marshal. A Maryland project is not choosing between them; it has to pass both reviews.

Neither code says it overrides the other. In practice the stricter provision controls each item, because a design that meets only one code fails the other reviewer. This article compares the two codes side by side, explains what Maryland law says about conflicts, and shows where the codes differ most for sprinklers, alarms and egress, as adopted as of November 2026.

What Are Maryland’s Two Codes?

The MBPS is Maryland’s building code, COMAR 09.12.51, administered by the Maryland Department of Labor. As of November 2026, Regulation .04A incorporates the 2021 IBC, IRC and IECC, with State amendments effective May 29, 2023, and local jurisdictions had to begin enforcing them by May 29, 2024. A county or municipality may adopt local amendments to the MBPS, and a local amendment prevails in that jurisdiction (COMAR 09.12.51.05).

The SFPC is COMAR 29.06.01, adopted by the State Fire Prevention Commission under Public Safety Article Section 6-206. Regulation .06 incorporates NFPA 1 and NFPA 101, both 2024 editions, effective June 23, 2025, and Regulations .07 and .08 carry the Maryland amendments to NFPA 101 and NFPA 1. Under Section 6-206(a), the SFPC has the force of law in every political subdivision of the State.

The MBPS itself tells the designer that both codes apply. Its amendments add notes to IBC Sections 901.1 and 1001.1 stating that the Chapter 9 fire protection requirements and the Chapter 10 means of egress requirements may be concurrently covered by the SFPC, which the State Fire Marshal or an authorized fire official enforces (COMAR 09.12.51.04B(4) and (5)). New Jersey divides the same territory by activity instead, as DGA’s comparison of the NJ Uniform Construction Code and the Uniform Fire Code shows; Maryland applies both codes to one design at the same time.

Figure 1: Two Codes, Two Reviewers, One Building

Maryland Building Performance Standards

• COMAR 09.12.51, Maryland Department of Labor
• 2021 IBC, IRC and IECC, effective May 29, 2023
• Enforced by the county or municipal building official
• Approval: the building permit and its fire protection permits
• Sprinklers to NFPA 13 (2019), referenced by the 2021 IBC
• Local amendments prevail in their jurisdiction

State Fire Prevention Code

• COMAR 29.06.01, State Fire Prevention Commission
• NFPA 1 and NFPA 101 (2024), effective June 23, 2025
• Enforced by the State Fire Marshal or a designated local fire official
• Approval: fire marshal plan review; NFPA 1 permits only by local policy
• NFPA 1 (2024) references NFPA 13 (2022)
• Applies to new and existing buildings; not in Baltimore City except Title 6, Subtitle 4 buildings

Side by Side: The MBPS and the State Fire Prevention Code

The table compares the two codes on the points that decide how a Maryland project is reviewed. Regulation sections are cited from COMAR as in force in November 2026.

Local fire codes add a third layer in some counties. Montgomery County, for example, adopts its own fire code on NFPA 1 and NFPA 101 (2021 editions) with NFPA 13 (2019), effective December 10, 2024, one edition behind the State code. The edition a reviewer applies therefore has to be checked county by county before the design basis is fixed.

Which Maryland Code Governs When the Two Disagree?

Neither the MBPS nor the SFPC states that it overrides the other. The MBPS notes say only that fire protection and egress may be concurrently covered by the SFPC. The SFPC conflict rule, COMAR 29.06.01.04C, addresses a different question: a conflict between the SFPC and a code or standard it incorporates, which the State Fire Marshal or designee decides, with appeal to the State Fire Prevention Commission.

Public Safety Article Section 6-206(d) sets the SFPC as a minimum. A more stringent State or local law applies if it is consistent with the SFPC and with recognized standards and good engineering practice, and the Commission decides any question about which law applies. Both Maryland amendment regulations also replace every NFPA 1 and NFPA 101 reference to NFPA 5000 with the building code the AHJ has adopted, so where the fire code points to a building code, it points to the IBC as adopted locally (COMAR 29.06.01.07 and .08).

The working rule follows from the review structure. The building official approves the permit set against the MBPS, and the fire marshal approves it against the SFPC, so the plans have to satisfy whichever limit is stricter on each item. Travel distance in a sprinklered warehouse shows how this plays out: the 2021 IBC allows 250 ft in a Group S-1 occupancy (Table 1017.2), or 400 ft in a one-story S-1 building with a ceiling of at least 24 ft (Section 1017.2.2), while NFPA 101 (2024) Table 42.2.6 allows 400 ft for sprinklered ordinary hazard storage. Unless the building meets the IBC one-story conditions, the design is laid out to 250 ft.

Figure 2: Which Provision Governs?

DGA prepares Maryland code analyses that cite both the Building Performance Standards and the State Fire Prevention Code, and coordinates the building and fire marshal reviews, across New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Delaware. Project briefs get confirmation and preliminary code feedback within one business day. See where DGA works →

Where the Maryland Codes Differ Most: Sprinklers, Egress and NFPA Editions

Most fire protection and egress rules line up, because NFPA 101 and the IBC cover the same ground. The differences that change a design sit in a handful of topics, listed in the table with the path each code takes.

The NFPA 13 edition is the difference that touches every sprinklered project. In Maryland, the county building permit reviews sprinklers to NFPA 13 (2019) through the 2021 IBC, while the State Fire Prevention Code (NFPA 1, 2024) references NFPA 13 (2022). The sprinkler drawings should name the edition and the hydraulic design basis so both reviewers read the same criteria.

The storage standpipe rule and the existing high-rise retrofit are fire code requirements with no IBC counterpart, so they are missed when a team designs to the building code alone. For warehouses, the storage-specific rules under NFPA 1 Chapter 34 are covered in DGA’s article on how Maryland and Delaware regulate high-piled storage.

Where Each Maryland Code Does Not Apply

The SFPC does not apply in Baltimore City, except to buildings and conditions covered by Public Safety Article Title 6, Subtitle 4, and it does not apply to buildings used only as dwellings for no more than 2 families (COMAR 29.06.01.03). Conditions that existed or were approved before the code took effect are not reached unless the AHJ finds a serious hazard, and the AHJ may waive an existing-building requirement where an alternative clearly gives a reasonable level of safety. The State Fire Marshal decides whether the chapter applies to a building, with appeal to the State Fire Prevention Commission.

The MBPS applies statewide through the building permit, but its text can change at the county line. A local amendment prevails in its jurisdiction and must reach the Department at least 15 days before it takes effect, though no amendment may weaken the sprinkler provisions for townhouses and one- and two-family dwellings (COMAR 09.12.51.05). The MBPS also replaces IBC Chapter 11 with the Maryland Accessibility Code, COMAR 09.12.53.

NFPA 1 permits are the third gap. Maryland deletes NFPA 1 Section 1.12 (Records and Reports), adds Section 1.13.1.1 placing permits and approvals under the AHJ’s own policies and procedures, and changes the permit language in Sections 1.13.6.13 and 1.13.8 from mandatory to permissive (COMAR 29.06.01.08). The State therefore issues no NFPA 1 operational permits as a matter of course.

Who Enforces Each Maryland Code: Building Official and Fire Marshal

The MBPS is enforced by the building official of each county and municipality that issues building permits. The SFPC is enforced by the State Fire Marshal, by a legally designated county or municipal fire official, or by others the State Fire Marshal appoints, and a required permit or approval comes from the State Fire Marshal or the appropriate authority where the work is located (COMAR 29.06.01.04A and D).

The Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM) Engineering Services Section reviews designs for new and modified fire alarm, fire suppression and smoke management systems, and OSFM is responsible for all State-owned property. Applicants start at the county permit office, which supplies the Fire Marshal Plan Review form. Some jurisdictions run their own fire review instead: Montgomery County’s Department of Permitting Services issues its own Fire Protection System and Fire Alarm System permits, Prince George’s County’s Department of Permitting, Inspections and Enforcement reviews fire work in its Fire and Life Safety Section, and Washington County has handled fire review for most building permits since July 1, 2025.

The filing steps, documents and review sequence are covered in DGA’s guide to how fire protection plan review works in Maryland.

How a Design Team Documents Compliance With Both Maryland Codes

A Maryland code analysis names both codes and their editions on the cover sheet: the 2021 IBC with the MBPS amendments and any county amendment, and NFPA 1 and NFPA 101 (2024) with the COMAR 29.06.01 amendments. The life safety plan then cites both codes for each egress item, IBC Chapter 10 and NFPA 101 Chapter 7 with the occupancy chapter, and shows which limit controls. A reviewer can then check the stricter value without rebuilding the analysis.

Sprinkler and fire alarm submittals state the edition of each referenced standard and the occupancy classification under both codes. Where the occupancy terms differ, such as an IBC Group S-1 warehouse that NFPA 101 treats as an ordinary hazard storage occupancy, the analysis lists both so the hazard basis is not argued twice.

Departures from a prescriptive rule go to each code’s own authority. The building official approves alternatives under 2021 IBC Section 104.11 for the MBPS, and the State Fire Marshal or designee approves alternatives of equivalent performance under COMAR 29.06.01.04B for the SFPC. Each approval covers only its own code, so the two requests are prepared together from one engineering basis.

Frequently Asked Questions

This article is general information, not a code determination for any project. Code editions, county amendments and reviewer practice change; confirm the adopted codes with the building official and the fire marshal for the jurisdiction where the building sits.