Top,
No a maintenance inspection is not necessarily or required on the
day of
the acceptance inspection.
Yes everything should be working, protection adequate, installation to
code and all documentation in order the day of the acceptance
inspection.
You asked "Are you asking the NFPA-25 inspection contractor to second
guess your acceptance process, evaluate the system design, water
supply
etc."
No not at all, my contention is that the maintenance inspection
typically occurs one year AFTER the acceptance inspection. A lot can
happen in one year especially in new buildings where the tenant and or
owner makes "minor" changes often without obtaining building permits,
anything from erecting partitions, creating closets, reconfiguring
storage, etc.
I agree in principal with Roland with regards to the Fire Code and
recurring inspections by the AHJ. However this is not always the case
and we depend on the contractor certification process for systems such
as fire sprinklers, fire alarms and special suppression. Because we
rely so heavily on these contractor certifications its critical
that we
know that these contractors are noting and reporting deficiencies such
as unprotected rooms or spaces, changes in hazard or occupancy in
addition to routine items such as missing or broken hangers,
painted or
obstructed sprinklers, changes in water supply and so forth.
My belief is that we can train our inspectors to recognize critical
items, report them accordingly where a decision can be made as to
whether the fire protection engineer and or AHJ needs to take a closer
look.
I'm 100% behind the fire protection industry and our fire protection
system base bears this out. We owe it to the occupants of our
buildings
and our fire fighters to assure their safety. We are also at a
crossroads, one where the passive wolves are at the door just waiting
for someone to slip up and leave the door unlocked. Let's not give
them
the key.
Yours in Fire Safety
John Drucker
Fire Protection Subcode Official (AHJ)
Borough of Red Bank, NJ
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Top
Myers
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:57 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: NFPA 25 Scope
John,
Maybe I am missing something. I agree that many owners do not inspect
there own systems or have a contractor do ITM per frequency in code
but
what are you seeing that suggests a need to do maintenance
inspection on
day of acceptance? To be accepted shouldn't everything be working?
Top Myers
Myers Risk Services
961 Pottstown Pike
Chester Springs, PA 19425
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web http://www.myersrisk.com
P- 610-321-2415 X219 C- 610-952-0965
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John
Drucker
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 3:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: NFPA 25 Scope
Top,
No and there would be no need to if the maintenance inspection
occurred
on the same day as the acceptance but that's never the case.
Reality is
that the maintenance inspection pursuant to NFPA-25 typically
occurs one
year AFTER the acceptance, and then every year thereafter. A lot can
happen in this time period. That's my point not to question the
initial
design or acceptance, ps although I'm sure we've all seen jobs
where the
the statement "how in the hell did this ever get approved" is mumbled
under ones breath.
John Drucker
Fire Protection Subcode Official (AHJ)
Borough of Red Bank, NJ
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Top
Myers
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 3:18 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: NFPA 25 Scope
When a sprinkler contractor gets an inspection contract it is after a
system has been installed under NFPA-13 and the local AHJ has accepted
the building and a Certificate of Occupancy has been given. Are you
asking the NFPA-25 inspection contractor to second guess your
acceptance
process, evaluate the system design, water supply etc. There has
to be
separation between responsibilities of the various parties. Very
often
inspectors for sprinkler contractors have been trained to perform the
specific inspection testing and maintenance requirements of the
standard. Remember the standard is not named Inspection Testing
Maintenance and Design for a reason.
How do all of these bad systems get approved?
Top Myers
Myers Risk Services
961 Pottstown Pike
Chester Springs, PA 19425
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
O - 610-321-2415 X-219
C - 610-952-0965
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John
Drucker
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:30 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: NFPA 25 Scope
Shouldn't the intent of a sprinkler "inspection, testing and
maintenance" standard be to assure the adequacy and fitness of a fire
protection system ?
I feel much better knowing that the mechanical condition of an
improper
or inadequate system has been verified. Scares me to think we
traded up
the passive fire protection.
What we have here is yet another lowering of the bar.
John Drucker
Fire Protection Subcode Official (AHJ)
Borough of Red Bank, NJ
PS- Owners will maintain systems when the law requires them to do
so, no
different then the same law that requires them to expend the money
(often grudgingly) and install the system in the first place. If it
weren't for mandatory fire codes the fire protection industry would be
on the back burner much like it was before construction code
regulations.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland
Huggins
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:49 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: NFPA 25 Scope
You totally missed the intent of the Scope statement. NFPA 25 is
basically verifying the mechanical condition of the system. It is
appropriately expected that the installing contractor did their job
and that the AHJ did theirs too.
Change of conditions whereby the system needs to be changed is a job
of the fire code and the AHJ to verify. There is a possible catch in
25 whereby the inspector asks if any changes to contents or layout of
the building as occurred but if the owner elects to say no or ignores
the recommendation to have it SEPARATELY evaluated, 25 won't fix it.
As for unprotected areas they get flagged by checking the condition
of the sprinkler (unless you are talking about concealed spaces).
In order to make 25 catch all these things (as well as 3 times
clearance etc), the cost would be so high no owners would do any
inspections. Then we would miss the problems with the overwhelming
majority that have NOT been violated in order to catch the small
percentage that have. It's like a municipality pushing to require
13R systems to protect the attic because there are attic fires. You
wind-up NOT adopting 13R so you lose the 99 buildings trying to save
the 1 that would have had an attic fire.
So instead of throwing the baby out with the bath water, lets have
NFPA 25 make sure what we have will properly function and implement
the Fire Code to ensure system adequacy.
Roland
On Jan 11, 2007, at 8:47 AM, John Drucker wrote:
Rod,
With that said is it not true that a determination by the maintenance
contractor is needed to assure that the system(s) being maintained
"have
been properly installed" in order for NFPA-25 to apply ?.
The scoping statement is very clear, systems that have not been
properly
installed are outside the scope of NFPA-25 so in effect an NFPA-25
inspection of an improperly installed system is null and void.
My point in this discussion is that the ultimate fire protection
goal is
to assure the health, welfare and safety of building occupants and
property protection where applicable. When a building owner or an
AHJ
receives a certificate of inspection from a contractor they assume
the
system will control a fire as designed by the applicable standard not
that an unprotected area or deficiency was ignored simply because
of the
fine print of the maintenance standard. If that's the case an annual
inspection by a qualified fire protection engineer is in order.
Sincerely in the interest of Fire Safety,
John Drucker
Fire Protection Subcode Official (AHJ)
Borough of Red Bank, NJ
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of rod
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 11:00 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Testing
John,
I agree with you that there are some real problems with the
inspections,
inspectors and enforcers. I do not believe however that we can get
into
a
situation where even NICET trained certified inspectors are getting
into
"protection deficiencies". This is a slippery slope and creates a
liability
for the contractor that NFPA 25 quite frankly puts on the owner. To
transfer
that liability to the contractor for $200 is not equitable. The only
people
with a "false" sense of security are those that do not read the
NFPA 25.
Rod DiBona
Rapid Fire
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John
Drucker
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:34 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Testing
New Jersey has extensive certification & licensing regulations for
fire
protection contractors. However coordination rarely occurs and flow
and
tamper switches are still be "tested" by alarm technicians moving
actuator
arms. I recently attained a flow switch improperly installed in a
copper
tee
to the extend the vane wasn't even in the water stream yet the "fire
alarm
inspection report" noted this device as functional even so far as
listing
the time delay.
Whats need in this situation is a requirement where only alarm
companies
and
or sprinkler companies be permitted to perform inspection in
testing in
suppressed/alarmed buildings that posess certification in BOTH
disciplines.
The reality is that even with NFPA-13, 72 and 25 gross errors and
omissions
are occuring during periodic inspections and tests. Inspectors
should
know
how to identify protection deficiencies not just installation and
maintenance deficiencies. NFPA-25 certifications give a false
sense of
security.
John Drucker
Fire Protection Subcode Official
New Jersey
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill
Minkel
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:20 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Testing
Tennessee where I work requires licensing.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris
Brown
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:52 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Testing
But when you look at the number of states that have a license
requirement
they are few. There are many of the larger cities have requirements
but
not
as a state. Look at Oklahoma, They have one of the best licensing
requirements I am aware of and they enforce it well for both the fire
alarm
and fire sprinkler industries. I think every state should be
looking at
what
the State of Oklahoma is requiring. Look at the web site for Oklahoma
Department of Health of the requirements if interested. They are
doing
the
right thing! Every one associated with fire protection has to be
licensed.
Thank you,
Chris Brown
Fire Protection Designer, Poole Fire Protection
Office: 913.829.8650 Direct: 913.747.2056 Cell: 913.208.3600
Fax:
913.829.8690
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland
Huggins
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:37 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Testing
there is a fine point you are missing. The OWNER of a PRIVATE
facility
is
typically allowed to do as much of their own work as they want to.
It's when you hire out to do work for someone else that licensing
enters
the
equation.
Roland
On Jan 10, 2007, at 12:29 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chris, Kansas isn't alone on that. I have a project in a nearby
state.
The owner wanted to do the installation himself. He has mechanics
that know how to use a pipe wrench. (this guy wanted a detail on
his
drawings of how to install an upright head, yes we are in
trouble.......)
Anyway, when I called the state board of licensure and asked the
lady
if you had to be specifically licensed to install sprinkler systems
her words were, "that's a good question, I don't know", so she
passed
me off to her department manager, who obviously read from the same
script
because he said the same thing. Seems in their state and local
municipality don't require permits or system inspections and so
anyone
can install it.
There is no consistency in the laws concerning licensing.
Craig L. Prahl, CET
Fire Protection Group
Mechanical Department
CH2MHILL
Lockwood Greene
1500 International Drive
PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax -
864.599.8439 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lg.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris
Brown
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:17 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Testing
In the state of Kansas all you need is transportation to the site it
even could be by mass transit and you can work on any type of fire
protection system. Wichita has some requirements and Kansas City
Missouri has a sprinkler contractors license requirement but other
than that any one can work on any fire protection system. We have
plumbers installing sprinkler systems and electricians installing
fire
alarm system. They don't even know what NFPA is.
Thank you,
Chris Brown
Fire Protection Designer, Poole Fire Protection
Office: 913.829.8650 Direct: 913.747.2056 Cell: 913.208.3600
Fax:
913.829.8690
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gregg
Fontes
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:56 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Testing
Does a C-10 and/or electrical/alarm contractors license allow
them to
contract the testing of water base fire protection systems? (I.E.
opening inspectors test valves, operating control valves, testing of
Pre-action/Deluge/Dry systems, generally can they operate any
component of a fire sprinkler system that has an alarm affiliated
with
it?)
Gregg Fontes
Cen-Cal Fire Systems, Inc.
209-334-9119
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
