NFPA 25 defines "deficiency" and "impairment" and discriminates between critical and non-critical conditions. Just as we don't require drain valves to be listed (because they're not a critical link in the functionality chain) we can assign the value of "non-critical" to those conditions which may not be exactly right, but that don't encumber the ability of a system to work as designed.
To your question about how to tag the system, that's purely subjective because requirements for reporting, tagging, certification, etc. all vary from state to state, jurisdiction to jurisdiction. So if this jurisdiction requires that a tag be placed on the riser and you have to put it in black or white terms, the system will work and I think it's overkill to tag it non-compliant for a 3-way valve. But your question was compound, so the next step is to create a correction/deficiency list and furnish copies to both owner and AHJ. But I wouldn't "red-flag" a system for any non-critical deficiency. About the gap: here in seismic country, such a gap is now REQUIRED if you don't use a swing joint or flexible hose connection for pendent drops. This is prescriptive code and resides in ASCE 7, which is adopted in CA and also the basis for the seismic bracing practices in NFPA 13. You can fill the annular space with an "oops" ring, but I'm not aware of anything in the code that ties the integrity of pendent sprinkler penetrations in ceilings to requirements for smoke barriers. I appreciate that you cited NFPA 101, but that standard isn't even adopted in many states (including mine), and is superseded by code in others. So again, I think you're going to get very subjective read-back on that from state to state, jurisdiction to jurisdiction. My 2¢ and personal opinion only ... Steve L. -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Allen, CET, CFPS Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 6:40 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Robert Sauls; Tania Dodson; Cody Sauls; Tracie Ghee Subject: I&T Roles and Responsibilities I have a couple questions that pertain to the roles and responsibilities of a water-based inspector. 1st Question: Should an inspector inspect water-based systems outside the requirements of NFPA 25? For example, NFPA 25 has no dialogue about 3-way shutoff valves for gauges. However, NFPA 13 (2013) clearly defines the requirement of such: NFPA 13 (2013) 8.17.3.2 Each gauge connection shall be equipped with a shutoff valve and provisions for draining. Therefore, if a 3-way shutoff valve is missing from installation, does this justify a non-compliant tag on the sprinkler riser and correction actions items identified to the owner(s)? 2nd Question: If there is a gap between my sprinkler head and the ceiling membrane, does this require a non-compliant tag on the riser. NFPA 101 outlines this as a smoke partition/barrier issue. NFPA 101 states: NFPA 101 (2000) - 8.2.4 Smoke Partitions. 8.2.4.1 Where required elsewhere in this Code, smoke partitions shall be provided to limit the transfer of smoke. 8.2.4.2 Smoke partitions shall extend from the floor to the underside of the floor or roof deck above, through any concealed spaces, such as those above suspended ceilings, and through interstitial structural and technical spaces. Exception:* Smoke partitions shall be permitted to terminate at the underside of a monolithic or suspended ceiling system where the following conditions are met: (a) The ceiling system forms a continuous membrane. (b) A smoketight joint is provided between the top of the smoke partition and the bottom of the suspended ceiling. (c) The space above the ceiling is not used as a plenum. Again, NFPA 25 does not identify this as a deficiency. Should this be justified as non-compliant deficiency? I do understand the role and responsibility of an inspection does not include the design of a water-based systems or of building code. However, when faced with a deficiency from installation (from other codes), should it not be identified and corrected under the inspection and testing of a water-based system? I look forward to your feedback and thoughts. Best Regards, John Allen, CET, CFPS President AFS: Allen Fire & Security Your Safety is Our Success Direct: 770.715.7261 | Office: 770.723.7280 Ext 2 | Fax: 678.894.4180 Please consider the environment before printing this email This email contains proprietary and confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient and is the sole property of AFS. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others without the permission of the sender is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of the message. _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
