A reader’s company was recently awarded the contract for the installation of a required manual and automatic fire alarm system in an existing commercial building. After the installation, the reader found that his installers placed the end of line (EOL) resistor at a device different than shown on the approved set of plans.
He asks: Is this installation still correct, and if not, what needs to happen to fix this confusion?
There are two issues here. First, your installers may have followed the specifications and not the drawings – and neither the drawings nor the written specifications override the other if they indicate conflicting information. If this is the case, you must ask for clarification from the system designer.
The second issue is what to do now that your team has already installed the wiring and made connections. Although substantial changes to the approved plans are supposed to be submitted for approval before any variations are made, this seems to be a small change, so a second approval may not be necessary. In this case, the actual installation will be reviewed to make sure the EOL is correctly installed.
In the real world, a wiring diagram is used to represent the physical positions of the IDC devices and their wiring connections to one another. If two or more levels of the building are involved, then a line RISER diagram will be used, with each “rise” representing another floor level.
On the other hand, if you show the IDC as a line connecting each device, in the order of their position on the circuit, then this is called a point-to-point diagram. If you connect the symbols you placed on the floor plan with a line indicating the circuit connections, then there is no need to also provide a second “riser” or point-to-point wiring diagram. Ordinarily, the circuit path and sequence of devices on an IDC is proposed or suggested by the designer of the system – following adopted rules and the manufacturer’s instructions.
If an issue comes up during the installation, the installer may decide that, based on actual conditions, a different path or wiring order is needed. Sometimes circumstances do not allow for prior approval of such a minor change and the installer may locate the EOL resistor where it is easier to get to later. This may be the case when choosing a manual pull box as the EOL location rather than the farthest device – for example, a rooftop unit duct detector.
Similarly, a wall notification appliance may be a better location for that EOL than a ceiling appliance. These lower, accessible locations greatly aid in quick and easy troubleshooting of circuit faults. They appear out of order on a wiring diagram, but are actually serving a purpose.
In the end, it seems your installers decided that they needed to run the wiring differently than planned, and the as-builts should reflect this minor change and be reviewed proper Class B wiring at the Acceptance Test, as well as for compliance with the equipment installation instructions and applicable codes.
Consulting with the AHJ
Another reader tells me that he always feels the need to ask the local AHJ what features and functions they want in order to pass the final inspection. Says that someone told him this was not necessary, since the inspectors are not supposed to be involved in the design of the system.
He asks: Is this true, or is it better to take the path of least resistance?
In fact, the administrative rules of the building codes require AHJs to enforce all the applicable adopted rules while specifically forbidding them from engineering or designing systems or features.
IBC Section 102 “Applicability and Jurisdictional Authority,” delineates what the AHJ can and cannot do. If they do not follow the rules as written there, that is covered by the last paragraph of IBC Section 100, “Violation of duties,” which reads: “Any person affected by the improper actions of any building department, building official, plans examiner, inspector, fire protection system designer, or local board of building appeals certified by the board of building standards may file a written complaint with the board.”
Your state should have a procedure for processing these complaints.
If the AHJ has given you a verbal order that is not required by a code section, or conflicts with a rule, you may think you are taking the “path of least resistance” and comply; however, be advised – you should not abdicate your professionalism. Make sure you understand the difference between the AHJ wanting you to change something, and the enforcement of the adopted rules.
You are not there to be their friend or enabler, but are allowed to educate them. If you are taking money for providing fire alarm and detection services, then you should know so much more than the AHJ.
Remember that AHJs wear many, many hats – of which our chosen profession, fire alarm systems – represents just a fraction of their skill set. In the end, if you find yourself worrying about what an AHJ is thinking, or going to say, it may be because you are not as proficient as you should be in your own knowledge of applicable codes/standards.
Be the professional and keep up with fire alarm system codes and regulations. There is always something new or more you can learn, and the AHJ keeps us on our toes.
Greg Kessinger has been SD&I’s fire alarm and codes expert and a regular contributor for more than 15 years. Email him your fire & life safety questions for potential inclusion in this column at [email protected].
