The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMIS95-0514 - FIR Inspections - 9/3/1993 MASON COUNTY FIRE MARSHAL Mason County Bldg. III 426 W.Cedar L & I INSPECTION P.O.Box 186 Shelton,Washington 98584 (206)427-9670 CODE ENFORCEMENT FIRE INSPECTIONS FIRE INVESTIGATION PUBLIC EDUCATION AUTOMATIC FIRE ALARM SYSTEM ACCEPTANCE TEST REPORT AD D R E S S----------,.------------------------------------ OCCUPANT_1 r0--g -- __PHONE --- US E ----------------=----------------------- -----------------------L FIRE ALARM CONTRACTOR PHONE CONTACT INSTALLER PLANS & PERMIT ON SITE YES NO PERMIT # CONTROL PANEL MFR MODEL #_ INITIATING CIRCUITS NO. OF SIGNAL CIRCUITS BATTERY VOLTAGE VOLTS CHG.CIRCUIT VOLTAGE VOLTS 2-&oe BATTERY VOLTAGE UNDER FULL LOAD VOLTS(SIGNALS OPERATING) Z!e-1#1011*4 TROUBLE SIGNAL WITH AC POWER OFF: YES NO SYSTEM OPERATES ON STANDBY POWER: YES-NO-N/A RV ALL SIGNALS OPERATE ON AC POWER: YES NO N/A �W ALL SIGNALS OPERATE ON STANDBY POWER: YES NO N/A ALL CIRCUITS CHECKED FOR ELECTRICAL SUPERVISION: YES NO N/A T104'wu55r, (/J C�C�1tdc� � CONTROL PANEL CHECKS MADE.PER NFPA& MFTRS. INSTRUCTIONS: YES_NO_N/A _ ALL AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT OPERATES: YES_NO_N/A_(ELEVATORS, FANS, DAMPERS) 22 CENTRAL STATIOd" 6kj6�_PHONE' - �� ACCOUNT #�ZI� 7� AUTOMATIC TIME DELAY OF ALARM SECONDS/MINUTES. NONE INSTALLED SYSTEM WIRING CONFORMS TO NFPA STANDARDS: YES NO PANEL KEY IN KNOX BOX: YES NO OPERATING INST. AT PANEL: YES NO TEST RECORDS POSTED AT PANEL: YES NO EQUIPMENT TESTED TYPE OF EQUIPMENT #UNITS IN BLDG, # UNITS TESTED COMMENTS AUDIBLE DEVICES { Q, D d� -___---- VISUAL DEVICES ---- -------- TROUBLE INDICATORS �_ - t� I V_ �----- HEAT DETECTORS 6 ------------ ------------ -------- A.F.S. SUPV. SWITCHES ------------ ------------ -------- SMOKE DETECTORS ------------ ------------ ------- MANUAL PULL STATIONS ��- WATER FLOW SWITCHES [L _ ------dam GENERATOR STARTS ------------ ------------ -------- VENTILATION CONTROLS -- ---- --- ------------ -------- CENTRAL STATION F.D MONITORING ------------ ------------ -------- ANNUNCIATORS ------------ ------------ -------- ELEVATOR RECALL ------------ ------------ -------- DOOR RELEASE ------------ ------------ -------- FIRE DAMPERS ------------ ------------ -------- PHONEJACKS AUTO DOOR LOCKS ------------ ------------ -------- AUTO DOOR RELEASES ------------ ------------ -------- OTHER ------------ ------------ -------- THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS AUTOMATIC FIRE ALARM SYSTEM HAS BEEN INSPECTED FOR RELIABILITY TO COVER THE ITEMS LISTED IN THIS REPORT, IS CONSISTENT WITH NFPA FIRE ALARM STANDARDS,AND THAT ALL CORRECTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE. A. SIGNATURE OF OWNER OR REPRESENTATIVE: DATE B. FIRE ALARM COMPANY: PHONE: C. SIGNATURE OF FIRE ALARM CO. REP: DATE fk D. FIRE ALARM CONTRACTOR LICENSE #: PROBLEMS FOUND:_ �� ---------------------------------------------- 7 CORRECTIONS MADE ------------------------------------------------------------------- Inspection Contract No. File No. FIRS15ROTECTTON SERVICES DIVISION 9th & Columbia Bldg. Gil-51, Olympia, WA 98504-4151 FIR£ ALARM SYSTEM REPORT OF INSPECTION Date Name of Facility: Occupied as• Address: C City J9 /�f} T� County: Zip q�.'�.2 __ 73 Telephone 2 7�i —O3 Building Designation (if more than one building) Inspection by: lei) �s:-��'je�� Title `'� Date of inspection: 9 " 2 o 1. Type of Test: Monthly ❑ Quarterly ❑ Semi-Annual Annual 2. Type of system: Noncoded Carman coded ❑ Selective coded ❑ Dual coded ❑ (as pertaining to chapter 212-14 WAC) 3. Local Fire Department: L 4. Fire Department Official Contacted: / 5. Test Received at Fire Department: Yes. � 6. Master Box Reset A.M. P.M. 7. Comments, explanation of unsatisfactory results, action taken, etc. SFM 222, Rev. 5/78 ORIGINAL FORM TO BE RETURNEil TO STATE FIRE i•iARSHAL. EQUIPMENT TESTED NUMBER OF TEST, SATISFACTORY N TYPE OF EQUIPMENT UNITS TESTED DATE CHECK MANUFACTURER Yes No N/A 8. Control Panel 9. Manual Station 10. Heat Detectors 11. Smoke Detectors Audible arm 12. Devices Visual Alarm 13. Devices 14. Code Transmitters Automatic Door 15. Releases 16. Trouble Indicators c/ d 9 A/L 17. Master Alarm Box 18. Batteries .� 2 �ZV/ 19. Charoer B ' L 20. Generator '21. Ventilation Control ire Department 22. Interconnection Central Station 23. Interconnection Exterior Sprinkler 24. Electric Alarm Bell Sprinkler Water 25. Flow Switch Sprinkler Gate Valve t/ 26. Suoery i s i on Switch �27. Annunciators l� 28. Automatic Time Delay of General Alarm Minutes. None Installed 29. Test of alarm system on emergency power, satisfactory? Yes �' No ❑ 30. This is to certify that this fire alarm system has been properly inspected for reliability covering the items listed in this report and is consistent with NFPA Fire Alarm Maintenance Standards.A. Signature of Owner or Representative VlY B. Signature of Fire Alarm Firm Representative C. Name of Firm Sound Electronics 0. Mailing Address 4621 Pacific Ave . Tacoma , Wa . 98408 Phone No!►72-2955 E. Electrical Contractors License # SOUNDE*14OR3 F. Specialty Electricians License # pq p v Inspection Contract No. File No. SEP 261997 FIF.L 1'RQT'..CTION S-RPIM DIVISION �Eni�l�l �a��s�A�C� �� Co 1 umb i d Bldg. GH-5 i, Olympia. WA 98504-4151 f�l a FIRE ALARr SYSTEM REPORT OF INSPECTION Date CI Name of Facility: Occupied as: L)6 UCr Address:— P L4 q 5 C i tx Zip ! ' �� Telephone 4�5-D3773 County. Building Designation (if more than one building) Inspection by: - I�SO+ti' Title Date of inspection: C 1. Type of Test: Monthly ❑ Quarterly ❑ Semi-Annual ❑ Annual 2. Type of system: Noncoded ❑ Coi. n coded ❑ Selective coded ❑ Oual coded ❑ (as pertaining to chapter 212-14 WAC) 3. Lccal Fire Oepartment: �! .�'�\� mc- 1 4. Fire Department Official Contacted: 5. Test Received at Fire Department: Yes E3 me �— Pk'*fZM Coo 6. Master Box Reset A.M. P.M. 7. Czamnts, explanation of unsatisfactory results, action taken, etc- C. - SFM 222, Rev. 5/78 ORIGINAL FORt-1 TO BE RETLRNEJ 70 STATE FIRE OARS�iAL- EQUIPMENT TESTED UM Y N TYPE OF EQUIPMENT UNITS TESTED DATE CHECK MANUFACTURER Yes No N/A S. Control Panel i 167 9. Manual Station 10. Heat Detectors 11. Smoke Detectors uaio ie arm I 12. Devices Visual Alarm 13 Devices I 14. Code Transmitters Automatic Door _ ✓. 15 . Releases 16. Trouble Indicators ) 17 . Master Alarm Box 18. Batteries d_z' 2)1IC_ 19. Charcer ZQ. Generator i21. Ventilation Control Fire Department 22. Interconnections' Central Station 423. Interconnection Exterior SprinKierI l i24 . Electric Alarm Bell I r Sprinkler Water 125 . Flow Switch L11< f _pri nK ler Gate Valve P��L_ 126 . Suoervision Switch 127. Annunciators 1+ 28. Automatic Time Delay of General Alarm Minutes. None Installed 29. Test of alarm system on emergency power, satisfactory? Yes n No ❑ 30. This is to certify that this fire alarm system has been properly inspected for reliability covering the items listed in this report and is consistent with NFPA Fire Alarm Maintenance Standards. A. Signature of Owner or Representative S. Signature of Fire Alarm Firm Representative _ C. Name of Firm Sound Electronics D. Mailing Address 4621 Pacific Ave . Tacoma , Wa . 98408 Phone No472-2955 Electrical �:ontractors License # SOUNDF, 140R3 F. Specialty Electricians License # G4Z74RI DRY PIPE VALVE TRIP TEST REPORT GRI MM FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS COMPANY �y FOR V `�'/a C'V' �`�A� LAI INSPECTION NO. STREET CITY V.�'� ` STATE (�/�L�`��'/� CONTRACT NO. 7 DATE OF TRIP EST INSPECTOR 7 V � �-�`' " A— DAY WORK NO. -� ` �� NOTE: BEFORE ANY DRY PIPE VALVE IS TRIP TESTED, THE WATER SUPPLY LINE TO IT SHOULD BE THOROUGHLY FLUSHED. THE TWO INCH DRAIN BELOW THE VALVE SHOULD BE OPENED WIDE, AND WATER AT FULL PRESSURE SHOULD BE DISCHARGED LONG ENOUGH TO CLEAR THE PIPE OF ANY ACCUMULATION OF SCALE OR FOREIGN MATERIAL. IF THERE IS A HYDRANT ON THE SUPPLY LINE, THIS HYDRANT SHOULD BE FLUSHED BEFORE THE TWO INCH DRAIN IS OPENED. THE DRIP VALVE ON THE DRY PIPE VALVE SHOULDBE CHECKED BEFORE TRIPPING THE DRY PIPE VALVE, TO SEE THAT IT IS IN OPERATING CONDITION. DRY PIPE VALVES SYSTEM NO. ( I SYSTEM NO. ( ) SYSTEM NO. ( ) SYSTEM NO. ( ) VALVE SERIAL NUMBER �'- 1 MANUFACTURER (NAME) ( ,,Av k VALVE MODEL t�3�J'ii, VALVE SIZE INCH INCH INCH INCH (LOCATION) !•:'ivv�ll�j 13� CONTROLLING SPRINKLERS (NUMBER) 100 (APPROX) (APPROX) (APPROX) (APPROX) DATE LAST TRIP TESTED? �w DATE LAST OPERATEDT C\l AIR 3� LeS LSS LSS LOS PRESSURE BEFORE TEST WATER LSS LSS LeS LSS SIZE AND LOCATION OF TEST VALVE 11 WAS GATE VALVE BELOW DRY VALVE OPEN may) WIDE AT TEST? (IF NOT HOW MANY TURN T) V ' + AIR PRESSURE LeS LeS LSS LeS VALVE TRIPPED AT WATER PRESSURE iv(j LeS Les Les LeS TIME MIN SEC MIN SEC MIN SEC MIN SEC IF SYSTEM FLOODED, LIST TIME WATER REACHED TEST OPENING I17 EC MIN SEC MIN SEC MIN SEC PERFORMANCE INTERIOR OF BODY `l MOVING PARTS VALVE CONDITION RUBBER FACING SEATS RESET? DID ALARMS OPERATE AT TRIP TEST? ALL LOW POINT DRAINS BLOWN OUT? WATER CONTROL VALVE LEFT v\ OPEN AND SEALED? ALARM CONTROL VALVE LEFT OPEN AND SEALED? QUICK OPENING DEVICES SYSTEM NO. ( ) SYSTEM NO. ( ) SYSTEM NO. ( ) SYSTEM NO. ( ) DEVICE SERIAL NUMBER MANUFACTURER (NAME) TYPE AND MODEL AIR PRESSURE IN UPPER CHAMBER LeS LSS LeS Ls! QUICK OPENING DEVICE TRIPPED AT S LSS SEC LSS SEC Los SEC LSS PERFORMANCE QUICK OPENING DEVICE LEFT IN SERVICE AND CONTROL OPEN AND SEALED? LIST ANY UNSATISFACTORY CONDITIONS: REMARKS: ORIGINAL Q GRINNELL FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS COMPANY INSPECTION CONTRACT INSPECTION REPORT No. N0. ............................. ................................ CONFERRED WITH REPORT OF INSPECTION BUREAU FILE ................ NO. ................................ ............................................... .... ...... ((, SET OF REPORT TO < < / BUILDING OR LOCATI""O""N SPJEO STREET ZZ INSPECTOR � J CITY&STATE �� a ir' nv V� GRINNELL OFFICE PHONE NO. 2 57 -2Z'2CJ ATT. DATE Z 1. GENERAL YetN A. (To be answered by the Owner or Owner's representative) a. Have there been any changes in the occupancy classification,machinery or operations since the last inspection? b. Have there been any changes or repairs to the fire protection systems since the last inspection? c. If a fire has occurred since the last inspection,have all damaged sprinkler system components been replaced? d. Has the piping in all dry systems been checked for proper pitch within the past five years? Date last checked (checking is recommended at least every 5 years) e. Has the piping in all systems been checked for obstructive materials? Date last checked (checking is recommended at least every 5 years) f. Have all fire pumps been tested to their full capacity through the use of hose streams or flow meters within the past 12 months? g. Are gravity,surface or pressure tanks protected from freezing? h. Are any of the sprinklers 50 years old or older? (testing and/or replacement is recommended for such sprinklers) i. Are any extra high temperature solder sprinklers regularly exposed to termperatures near 300°F? B. (To be answered by the inspector) a. Have the sprinkler systems been extended to all visible areas of the building? b. Does there appear to be proper clearance between the top of all storage and the sprinkler deflector? c. Are the building areas protected by a wet system,heated,including its blind attics and perimeter areas,where accessible? d. Are all visible exterior openings protected against the entrance of cold air? 2. CONTROL VALVES a. Are all sprinkler system main control valves and all other valves in the appropriate open or closed position? b. Are all control valves sealed or supervised in the open position? Control No. Easily Valve Secured? Supervision Valves of Type Accessible Signs Open If yes,how? (Sealed?) Operational Locked? Valves Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No (Su vd.?)) Yes No CITY CONNECTION rpullJ TANK PUMP SECTIONAL SYSTEM / ALARM LINE 3. WATER SUPPLIES i Pressure Fire Pump&Tank a. Water supply source? City Gravity Tank Pressure Fire Pump&City Waterflow Test Results Made During This Inspection Pressure Fire Pump&Pond Test Size Static Static Test Size Static Static Pipe Test Pressure Flow Pressure Pipe Test Pressure Flow Pressure Located Pipe Before Pressure After Location Pipe Before Pressure After . r( 4. TANKS,PUMPS,FIRE DEPT.CONNECTIONS Yes N.A.# No* a. Do fire pumps,gravity,surface or pressure tanks appear to be in good external condition? b. Are gravity,surface and pressure tanks at the proper pressure and/or water levels? c. Are fire dept.connections in satisfactory condition,couplings free,caps or plugs in place and check valves tight? d. Are fire dept.connections visible and accessible? S. WET SYSTEMS a. No.of systems Make&Model b. Are cold weather valves in the appropriate open or cl position? If closed,has piping been drained? c. Has the owner or owner's representative n advised that cold weather val es are not recommend y NF ? d. Have all the antifreeze system b ted? e. Date antifreeze systems wieprEotection f. The antifreeze tests'n to: system 1 7 4 S temperature g. Did alarm valves,waterflow alarm indicators and retards test satisfactorily? A VICO INTERNATIONAL LTD. COMPANY *Not Applicable G4550_� Explain(No)Answers on Back of Sheet 2 nDlf_lKIAI n G FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS COMPANY INSPECTION CONTRACT NO. ..... INSPECTION REPORT REPORT OF INSPECTION BUREAU FILE ................ No. _........ ........ .. .._ .. SET 2OF2 6. DRY SYSTEMS N No* a. No.of systems Make&Model ,• \ Date last trip tested _ —00 b. Is the air pressure and priming water levels normal? c. Did the air compressor operate satisfactorily? d. Were all low points drained during this inspection? e. Did all quick opening devices operate satisfactorily? I. Did all the dry valves operate satisfactorily during this inspection? g. Do dry valves appear to be protected from freezing? h. Is the dry valve house heated? 7. SPECIAL SYSTEMS a. No.of systems Make&Model Type b. Were valves tested as required? c. Did all heat responsive systems operate satisfac y? d. Did the supervisory features operate dur' testing? Heat Responsive Devices: Type Type of test Valve No. 1.. ... 2...... 3...... 4...... 5...... 6...... Valve o. 1....�2. �3— ..4...... 5......6...... Valve No. ...... 2...... 3...... 4...... 5......6...... ValveN 1. .. 4...... 5......6...... Valve No. 1...... 2...... 3...... 4...... 5...... 6...... Valve No. 1...... ...... ...... 4...... 5...... 6...... Valve No. 1...... 2...... 3...... 4...... 5...... 6...... Valve No. 1...... 2...... 3......4...... 5...... 6...... Auxiliary equipment: No. Type Location Test results 8. ALARMS Yes N.A.# No' a. Did the water motors and gong operate during testing? b. Did the electric alarms operate during testing? c. Did the supervisory alarms operate during testing? 9. SPRINKLERS—PIPING a. Do sprinklers generally appear to be in good external condition? b. Do sprinklers generally appear to be free of corrosion,paint,or loading and visible obstructions? c. Are extra sprinklers available on the premises? d. Does the exterior condition of piping,drain valves,check valves,hangers,pressure gauges,open sprinklers / and strainers appear to be satisfactory? e. Does the hand hose on the sprinkler system appear to be in satisfactory condition? 10. EXPLANATION OF"NO"ANSWERS(For Sections 16 thru 9): 11. THE INSPECTOR SUGGESTS THE FOLLOWING NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS.HOWEV ,THESE SUGGESTIONS ARE NOT THE RESULT OF AN ENGINEERING SURVEY: 12. ADJUSTMENTS OR CORRECTIONS MADE: 13. LIST CHANGES IN THE OCCUPANCY HAZARD OR FIRE PROTECTION EQUIPMEN ,AS ADVISED BY THE OWNER IN SECTION 1A: 14. INSPECTION AND SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS W DISCUSSED WITH THE UNDERSIGNED OWNER OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE? Signature of owner or owner's re resentative Date DUPLICATE TO: STREET CITY&STATE ZIP ATT. ;Not Applicable G4550-2 A tgC0 INTERNATIONAL LTD. COMPANY *Explain(No)Answers on Back of Sheet r%nie,-- r HOOD CAA° NAL WETLANDS PF OJEC7 � J June 21 , 1992 SUN 231992 GENIF Dave Salzer Fire Marshal Mason County Department of General Services PO Box 186 Shelton,WA 98584 Dear Dave: Thank you for taking the time last week to elaborate on your letter to Carol Wentlandt re: fire protection issues relevant to the proposed Hood Canal Wetlands I nterpretive Center. I have a much better understanding of your position and the facts,and will be sharing our discussion with our site selection subcommittee. To recap our conversation,you stated that the Uniform Fire Code consists of enforceable legal guidelines that apply to any new structure. Some kinds of facilities have more requirements than others,depending upon usage, size and building materials. The UFC also allows for options and is to a certain extent flexible in meeting the needs of a particular project. Meeting necessary UFC requirements is a part of the building permit process. The rationale for requiring a 20 foot wide access road is that it allows for two-way traffic, conceivably to get fire apparatus in,and other people out. Since that is the optimum situation in an emergency,you stated you will push FD 2 for this width, to be consistent with the UFC. In response to my inquiry about an earlier letter from FD 2 stating they would accept a 12 foot width, all-weather surface with turnouts,you stated that if the local fire district says they can effectively operate with this, then that wi11 have weight in the permit process. You stated an "all-weather driving surface"varies,and could be anything from asphalt to a hard gravel road. It must be capable of supporting fire apparatus, and is subject to the approval of the Fire Marshal. You indicated that options are available, and the outcome is often the result of a negotiation process. You said it is not uncommon for regulations to "get in the way" of architects and aesthetics, and vice versa, and that much of the design process includes on-going negotiations between architects and building/fire departments. Architects work closely with the county departments to to provide for mutually agreeable building materials,access and protection. Again, the local fire department's ability to provide adequate protection is also taken into account. envi. wr educa«7*ograrn c�r The North Mason School District P.O. Box 167, Beifair, WA 98528 (206) 275-8303, 275-2881 Printed on Racycled Paper i., You did not have enough information about the project to determine if a sprinkler system would be required, but explained that was driven by "fire flow", which is the predetermined gallons per minute required for fire fighting. If the water company says they can't deliver the required flow then the architect would have to make the building more fire-resistant -- by adding sprinklers, for example,and/or altering construction materials used. There are a number of ways this can be accomplished. Sprinklering a building can reduce the required fire flow by as much as 75%. Finally, based on your review of the three proposed building locations,you stated, "the technology exists to accomodate building at any of the 3 sites, but there are tradeoffs." The tradeoff in selecting the meadow location would be an increased cost for compliance, ie: meeting more regulations, running more water lines, possible infrastructure changes, etc. Dave, if I have in any way misrepresented our conversation in the above, I would appreciate hearing from you. You could also contact Becki Plumb at our Wetlands Office, (206) 275-8303. If our committee feels the need for additional clarification, I'll take you up on your offer to attend a meeting! Thanks again for your time in helping our committee to make a most informed determination on this issue. Sincerely, Martha Wightman Chairman,Site Selection Subcommittee (206)275-6396