The issue of not having a shut off valve in the fire department connection

[SprinklerDesigner2]

I've just completed a project where the issue of having a shut off valve in the fire department connection line has come up.

What I have is exactly the situation presented in FIGURE A.8.17.2.4.4(b) except I photo-shopped a yard post indicating valve between the 8"x8"x4" tee in the pit and flange and spigot piece in the building.

Below is photo of actual project where water enters the pit from the right (the pumper hydrant you see is upstream the pit), travels through a large water meter followed by a double check where with O.S.&Y's followed yet again by an 8"x8"xx4" flanged tee that has a 4" check valve between the 8" line and FDC. Of course there is not a shut-off valve in the 4" line between the FDC and 8"x8"x4" flanged tee.

From the pit there is a single yard post indicator valve with tamper switch, this is the red PIV I photo-shopped into the figure, whereupon the 8" underground continues on to feed a manifolded sprinkler system serving the building in the background.

PS I already know the answer, it's fine as is, but I am asking for the clarification of others. I think what it comes down to is what is the definition of the line between the FDC and system connection?

Thank you for your input.

 

[cdafd]

Not much difference then the control valves on the risers.

The less the valves the better chance one will not be shut off.

 

[chicopee]

What you are trying to do seems contrary to NFPA24 section5.9.3.2 that you have shown. I would definitely get hold of the State Fire Marshal or the local fire department and determined if the existing set up was acceptable to them. I am assuming that you may be working with a fire insurance carrier.

 

[SprinklerDesigner2]

Detail of Pit 1 as shown in Exhibit 13 from the Fire Protection Handbook clearly shows post indicators in the system line but not between the FDC and the system.

What the standard prohibits is a shut-off valve in the line from the FDC to the system so where does the FDC end and the system begin? The system begins at the point where the FDC connects to the system which is the 8"x8"x4" tee.

 

[Oremus]

I agree with chicopee.

If you had a backflow preventor in a pit at the same location as your PIV then it would become obvious that it's a little backwards. The FDC is usually after a BFP. Look at nfpa 24: 5.9.3.2 as referenced by chicopee then look at the definition of a 'fire service line' in the same standard.

The intent is pretty obvious: you don't want anyone to be able to mistakenly close down anything that would influence the Fire Dept's ability to pump up the fire system(s).

 

[MatthewJWillis]

First, good job on the photo shop.
Two, you know the answer.
3, for those that don't, figure A8.17.4.4(b) indicated above, provides the answer.

R/
Matt

 

[SprinklerDesigner2]

Matthew,

If anyone has any doubt there is absolutely nothing wrong with placing the post indicator valve in the system piping line. Fact is there is nothing in the standard that says I can't place ten supervised yard post indicator in the system piping other than the section in the standard that says "Don't be stupid".

Ideally I would like to find where to get the extension to the post indicator that fits over the O.S.&Y. as shown in NFPA #24 Figure A.5.9(b):

I know you can "make one" but I refuse to touch it because everything must be UL/FM or I would. To be sure I've never asked Mueller or Kennedy directly if they made such an animal but I have looked at all their literature. If it is available from the manufacturer can someone point out who?

I've seen 4" coming off the top of alarm check valves inside the building then running 100' out to a free standing FDC and I have to tell you I see so much wrong in this.

First off, in most cases, if you think that 4" line has been hydrostatically tested then you've never worked for a fire sprinkler contractor. If that line has been tested, like the one where I witnessed the fitters hydro in Ohio in 1975, that is the LAST time it will ever see water because, unlike a manual standpipe in NFPA #14, it doesn't have to be.

I know where there's an underground fed FDC's in Macon, Georgia that has the date 1952 on the check valve. That 4" underground line hasn't had water on it since 1952 if then which I very much doubt. In my mind talking about a "weak link" this is it. What's the chances of that soon to be 65 year old never used, or pressurized once, 150' line being collapsed, disconnected or just plain plugged up as opposed to be yard post indicator with central monitored tamper switch being closed off?

In Georgia supervising valves with chain and lock is not allowed. EVERYTHING gets a tamper switch and must be wired to a central station.

How this all came about is I had a fire department inspector ask me about it and was his interpretation that the post indicator was in the FDC line was correct. I told him that nothing was wrong with the valve placement but he still seemed unsure.

 

[MatthewJWillis]

I worked over 20 years in GA. I know 120-3-3, (and Mr. Saade) well.

In Augusta, the pits come with the valve. Always a dispute between parties.
I have found that here in SD, it is addressed (and used) a little better. They take the FDC pretty seriously. Which for an old GA designer is a strange concept.

R/
Matt

 

[cdafd]

5.9.3.2 Control valves shall not be installed in the piping from the fire department connection to the fire service main.


5.9.3.2.1* Control valves shall be permitted in the system piping downstream of the fire department connection piping.

 

[cdafd]

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 24-12 Log #CP2 AUT-PRI
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ Technical Committee on Private Water Supply Piping Systems,
Revise text to read as follows:
5.9.3.2 No shutoff valve shall be permitted in the piping from the fire department connection to the point that the fire
department connection piping connects to the system piping.
In the 2010 edition of NFPA 13, annex figures were added to clarify that the no shutoff valve requirement applied to the fire department connection piping. (A.8.17.2.4.4. (a) & (b)). Some AHJ’s felt that this requirement meant that there could be no shutoff valve downstream of the fire department connection throughout the entire system. This additional text clarifies the requirement.

 

[TravisMack]

In the hot desert area, it is very common to put the BFP right as you enter the property and an FDC after the BFP before you go back underground to feed the building or loop. There may be several sectional valves in the underground piping.

2013 edition:

8.17.2.4.3 For multiple systems, the fire department connection shall be connected between the supply control valves and the system control valves.
8.17.2.4.4* The requirements of 8.17.2.4.2 and 8.17.2.4.3 shall not apply where the fire department connection is connected to the underground piping.


The last line there pretty much states that you don't apply the underground valves to the scenario you have. So, as you said, you could in theory put 10 PIVs right there and still be in compliance. You might be considered a wasteful spending layout tech, but it would be in compliance.

Travis Mack
MFP Design, LLC

http://www.mfpdesign.com

"Follow" us at

https://www.facebook.com/pages/MFP-Design-LLC/92218417692

 

[SprinklerDesigner2]

Travis,

I know there's nothing wrong with what we have but the grand opening of the new 55,000 sq ft store is approaching very rapidly and I need a certificate of occupancy.

The local fire official is of the decent sort and all I need do is collect enough to make him feel comfortable. I feel he is most of the way there but I don't want him to have any doubts as to the correctness of the installation.

Fire Sprinklers; 5% of the project and 90% of the problems.

 

[TravisMack]

Just give him 8.17.2.4.4 and show him that it is not an issue at all. It may take him a bit to get there, but he should be able to.

Travis Mack
MFP Design, LLC

http://www.mfpdesign.com

"Follow" us at

https://www.facebook.com/pages/MFP-Design-LLC/92218417692

 

[cdafd]

Did the fire dept do plan review of the underground??

As in this should have been questioned during plan review.

Plus picture shows piv is monitored.


Offer a Knox padlock, to lock it down, if they do the Knox system or just a plain cuttable lock.

 

[SprinklerDesigner2]

I thought all would be interested to know I got an answer and everything is now resolved.

We are a member of the NFSA and one of the fine services they offer is their Expert of the Day program.

The question I asked was identical to the first post and what follows is the answer I received back at 5:00 Friday afternoon:

You have referenced NFPA 24, 2013 Edition. You have noted that the scenario is as depicted in Figure A.8.17.2.4.4(b) with the addition of a post indicator valve (PIV) outside the building but after the tee where the fire department connection (FDC) feeds into the underground (shown in your attached file). Specifically, you have asked if the PIV downstream of the point where the FDC line connects to the private water system is acceptable.

The answer is "yes." The 2016 Edition of NFPA 24 has just been made available. This language was revised in that edition in order to provide clarity. Section 6.2.1.1 states, "Control valves shall not be installed in the piping from the fire department connection to the point it connects to the fire service main." This line tees into the private fire service main in the figure. Section 6.2.1.2 goes on to state, "Control valves shall be permitted in the system piping downstream of the fire department connection." This is to make sure that all users know a control valve is permitted to be downstream of the FDC. Of course, it is important to only use valves necessary for the function of the system as additional valves require additional maintenance over the life of the system.

I forwarded it the local AHJ and he is totally happy because he has a place to hang his hat.

Did the fire dept do plan review of the underground??

As in this should have been questioned during plan review.

No, but it was not my fault. I don't want to get into it but what did happen only happens in one of a thousand projects and this project was my turn. I was totally innocent, honest.

 

[bmlxd40]

I didn't realize that 120-3-3 didn't allow chain and locks. Learned something new today. Thanks.