Fire sprinklers are incredibly effective. For example, in the United States, between the years 2015 and 2019, the civilian death and injury rates per fire were 89% and 27% lower, respectively. The rate of fire personnel injuries was 67% lower. During this period, sprinklers operated in 92% of structure fires and were effective in controlling the fire 96% of the time when they operated.
Data also shows that over three-quarters of the instances where sprinklers failed to operate is attributed to a lack of maintaining the system in working order, with the system being shut off accounting for 57% of failures.1 In other words, the simple task of ensuring that control valves are open significantly lowers the risk of a loss resulting from fire.
NFPA 25 Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Suppression Systems was first published in 1992. Prior to its introduction, maintenance guidelines for the various types of systems were contained in the installation standards or in recommended practices such as NFPA 13A. Recognizing that the majority of system failures can be prevented with systematic inspection, testing and maintenance (ITM), it was decided that enforceable requirements were needed. Most of the requirements found in NFPA 25 have their origins with insurance ITM requirements for highly protected risks (HPR). As a result, property owners often feel that the requirements are onerous and that the expense of compliance does not offset the decreased risk of system failure and the resultant economic loss.
The intent of this article is not to debate the merits of compliance to NFPA 25 but rather to emphasize the need to have a level of periodic ITM that is appropriate to the hazard and the owner’s appetite for risk. NFPA 25 allows the use of alternate programmes that provide an equivalent level of protection that is approved by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). NFPA defines AHJ in broad terms: ‘An organization, office, or individual responsible for enforcing the requirements of a code or standard, or for approving equipment, materials, an installation, or a procedure.’ For many international properties, the only AHJ is the property owner. In these instances, it is the owner who alone determines the level of ITM utilized and it is typically their onsite employees who are tasked with performing the ITM.
With this in mind, and based on my own experience, I recognize the challenges faced in having a working ITM programme. A lack of qualified personnel is perhaps the toughest obstacle to overcome. It is important to acknowledge that NFPA 25 allows, and even expects, the owner or their representative(s) to perform the various ITM tasks, many of which provide the biggest returns in risk reduction. Considering this, I suggest that the following tasks should always be a part of the ITM procedures for any property.
- Once a month, inspect all system control valves to verify that they are open and supervised. Supervision should consist of locking the valve in the open position or using a tamper switch to remotely monitor the valve position. I recommend both. The control valves for water-based systems must be of an indicating type – meaning that their open or shut status can be verified visually. This task requires minimal training and little time to conduct. If done regularly, this single inspection can reduce the risk of system operational failure by more than 50%. This would increase the rate of successful operation from 92% to over 96%. A remarkable return for a small investment of time.
- Verify the operational status of the fire pump. This requires a more extensive level of training but is still well within the skill set of any property that has on-site maintenance personnel. This includes a periodic no-flow operation of the pump, which is once weekly for an engine driver or once monthly when using an electric motor. The operational status is confirmed by verifying that the pump controller is showing all systems to be in a satisfactory status (green) along with performing an automatic start of the pump by simulating waterflow from a waterflow or other initiation device.
- Confirm that water storage tanks or reservoirs are full, or at a minimum, contain sufficient quantities to satisfy the demands for any fires.
- Confirm that all waterflow devices are operational. This is typically accomplished by simulating the minimum flow for a sprinkler or other discharge device to verify that all required alarms (local and remote) are functioning.
There are other inspections that can be conducted with limited training, such as those regarding the condition of sprinklers, piping and support systems. These are basic inspections conducted from the floor level to verify that the devices and equipment appear to be undamaged and operational.
NFPA data shows that far too many sprinkler-system failures to operate, or their ineffectiveness, are directly attributed to a lack of maintenance. Following the requirements of NFPA 25 is an important component to a high-level risk management programme. However, do not allow the complex nature of conducting ITM for every single component at the specified intervals overwhelm you to the point that you do nothing. Conducting regular inspections and testing on the basic system components will have a significant, positive impact on reducing the risk of system failure while increasing system effectiveness.
Remember, a small amount of effort can bring great peace of mind for those responsible for managing the risk of fire.
References
1. NFPA Research US Experience with Sprinklers Marty Ahern Oct 2021.
About the Author
Russell B. Leavitt, CFPS, SET is the Executive Chairman of Telgian, a fire protection, life safety and security industry leader, and is the Chair of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). Throughout his career, he has authored numerous articles and training guides, including the American Fire Sprinkler Association (AFSA) Beginning Inspector Training Program and the AFSA Online Hydraulics Training Program. In addition, he is a major contributor to several NFPA Handbooks and has served as the subject matter expert for numerous NFPA live and online training programmes. A sought-after speaker and presenter, Leavitt shares his more than 40 years of experience in the fire-protection industry by conducting training presentations for many professional and industry organizations across the US and internationally. www.Telgian.com
“Please note that any opinions expressed in this article are mine alone and do not represent an official statement or position of the NFPA.”
