Sprinkler Inspection NFPA 25: Sprinkler room not separated 1

[PeterStahl]

Hello,

I have the following question: We construct a building WITHOUT fire seperation of the fire pump (diesel) room from the parking lot.
This is a clear violation to the NFPA 20, 2013: 4.12.1.1.2
Now I was asked if this is a critical or noncritical deficiency according to the NFPA 25 and its "Acceptance Checklist" Form V-2 for Fire pump systems.

Can anyone give an advice, does any Norm say something about this. In the NFPA 25 I could not find anything.

Thanks in advance.

 

[PeterStahl]

or how would your answer be in this casse?

 

[SprinklerDesigner2]

"I am here to inspect the mechanical operation of your system." You are to assume the system was approved by the AHJ and was installed correctly back in the day.

When the system was installed in 1962 did it meet the standards in effect at that time?

When it was installed were there any standards adopted by the building code in effect at the time? Don't laugh, Ohio didn't have any adopted sprinkler standards prior to 1974 and all we ever did was get ISO, Factory Mutual, IRI or Lumbermen's approval. Many, many times ISO would approve something not in conformance with NFPA #13 because they were an insurance organization and could accept anything on the basis "something is better than nothing".

For you to "write it up" you would have to make the assumption it was installed wrong. Wrong according to who?

An example if I may; if you see a sidewall sprinkler installed 19" down from the ceiling do you write it up? If you do how do you know a professional engineer didn't perform calculations showing performance which a professional engineer is allowed to do? The answer is you don't know which is why you need to make the assumption everything was approved when it was installed because you simply do not know otherwise.

Performing the inspection the only standard you should look at is NFPA#25 and not 13, 14, 20, 24 etc. Your job is not to correct mistakes made 70 years ago because you do not know if there were mistakes made or not. Same with spacing, what were the spacing rule in 1938?

For a 13R system we could use up to four quick response sprinklers in a dwelling unit, sometimes referred to at the Hotel Rule, so dry pendents could be used 13R. I did a job on Lake Erie that has five quick response dry pendent sprinklers in each dwelling unit and yes, it is wrong but I did to to the Ohio Board of Building Standards and Appeals which is empowered by law to grant deviations and waivers... I got such a waiver in writing so what I did was not wrong though some inspectors, who go well beyond what they are supposed to do, might just write me up. An inspector should assume the job was installed correctly even if he notes five sprinklers.

Sent by my phone, excuse the typo's.