FIRE ALARM SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION AND COMMISSIONING Fire System Alarm System Design Documentation

Since the subject project is a Facilities Improvement Project of the Ministry of Defense of Japan, there are a lot of documentation which is very specific to this program. The programming document is titled US Forces Japan Standard Form 22. Then, a

Criteria Package is prepared by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Japan District to define the US criteria that need to be followed for this project. The UFC 3-600-01, UFC 4-021- 01, NFPA 101, NFPA 72, NFPA 70, as well as International Business Code requirements are identified in the Criteria Package. Then, a Definitive Detailed Drawings are prepared to bilaterally agree upon the criteria that will be followed for the subject project.

Construction Drawings are then prepared that detail the specific fire alarm design. Once the design and complete and the construction is completed, as built drawings will be provided by the construction contractor and their respective sub-consultants.

Through the aforementioned documentation in the Facilities Improvement Project, the majority of the information that should be included in a comprehensive fire alarm system design required by the NFPA 72 will be provided. Where documentation is required by the authority having jurisdiction, the following list shall represent the

minimum documentation required for new fire alarm systems, supervising station and shared communication equipment, and emergency communications systems, including new systems and additions or alterations to existing systems. The Facilities Improvement Project document where the information can be found will be listed in parenthesis in the NFPA 72 list:

(1) Written narrative providing intent and system description (Criteria Package) (2) Riser diagram (Construction Drawings)

(3) Floor plan layout showing locations of all devices, control equipment, and supervising station and shared communications equipment with each sheet

showing the following (Criteria Package, Construction Drawings, and As-Builts): a. Point of compass (north arrow)

b. A graphic representation of the scale used c. Room use identification

d. Building features that will affect the placement of initiating devices and notification appliances

(4) Sequence of operation in either an input/output matrix or narrative form (Construction Drawings)

(5) Equipment technical data sheets (Construction Drawings)

(6) Manufacturers’ published instructions, including operation and maintenance instructions (As-Builts)

(7) Battery capacity and de-rating calculations (where batteries are provided) (Construction Drawings)

(8) Voltage drop calculations for notification appliance circuits (Construction Drawings)

(9) Mounting height elevation for wall-mounted devices and appliances (Construction Drawings)

(10) Where occupant notification is required, minimum sound pressure levels that must be produced by the audible notification appliances in applicable covered areas (Criteria Package)

(11) Pathway diagrams between the control unit and the supervising station and shared communications equipment (Construction Drawings)

(12) Completed record of completion in accordance with 7.5.6 and 7.8.2 (As- Builts)

(13) For software-based systems, a copy of site-specific software, including specific instructions on how to obtain the means of system and software access (password) (As-Builts)

(14) Record (as-built) drawings (As-Builts)

(15) Records, record retention, and record maintenance in accordance with Section 7.7 (As-Builts)

(16) Completed record of inspection and testing in accordance with 7.6.6 and 7.8.2 (As-Builts and commissioning report)

Record of Completion

The subject project is a Facilities Improvement Project of the Ministry of Defense of Japan. All formal government testing, inspection, and documentation will be in Japanese since it needs to be in compliance with the Japanese Fire Service Law. The US government is generally allowed to do its own testing of the fire alarm systems after the formal Japanese systems are completed. Normally, the base fire department with cooperation from related base support personnel such as the fire protection engineer. In addition to the Japanese documents, the US base personnel do complete a record of completion for the project building to the extent this is practical.

The record of completion shall be documented in accordance with NFPA 72 Section 7.5.6 and the UFC 3-600-01. There is other record of completion forms that are produced by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Japan District as part of the construction closeout procedures. The basic required information can be found in the record of completion forms, Figure 7.8.2(a) through Figure 7.8.2(f) of NFPA 72. The UFC 3-600- 01 and US Army Corps of Engineers, Japan District forms are largely based on the NFPA 72 forms and do contains the information from Figure 7.8.2(a) through Figure 7.8.2(f) applicable to the installed system. The record of completion documentation is normally

77 completed with the construction contractor by the construction representative and

submitted to the authority having jurisdiction, which is the Navy Fire Protection Engineer, and the owner at the conclusion of the job. The record of completion

documentation shall be permitted to be part of the written statement required in 7.5.2 and part of the documents that support the requirements of 7.5.8. The preparation of the record of completion documentation shall be the responsibility of the qualified and experienced person in accordance with NFPA 72 Section 10.5.2.

Where required by the authority having jurisdiction, compliance of the completed installation with the requirements of the NFPA 72, UFC 3-600-01, and IBC shall be certified by a qualified and impartial third-party organization acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction. For complex facilities, a third-party commissioning agent will be procured to implement this commissioning effort. For simple projects, the construction representative from the US Army Corps of Engineers, Japan District will implement a simplified commissioning effort. Verification of compliant installation shall be performed according to testing requirements and procedures specified in NFPA 72 Section 14.4.1 and 14.4.2. Verification shall ensure that: all components and functions are installed and operate per the approved plans and sequence of operation; all required system documentation is complete and is archived on site; for new supervising station systems, the verification shall also ascertain proper arrangement, transmission, and receipt of all signals required to be transmitted off-premises and shall meet the requirements of 14.4.1 and 14.4.2; for existing supervising station systems that are extended, modified, or reconfigured, the verification shall be required for the new work only, and reacceptance testing in accordance with Chapter 14 shall be acceptable; and written confirmation has been provided that any required corrective actions have been completed.

Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance

As stated above, for complex facilities, a third-party commissioning agent will be procured to implement this commissioning effort for inspection, testing, and

maintenance. The commissioning contract for complex facilities starts during the design phase, goes through the construction phase, and has inspections up to 2 years after the construction is complete. For simple projects, the construction representative from the US Army Corps of Engineers, Japan District will implement a simplified commissioning effort. Inspection, testing, and maintenance will be the purview of the using agency once the facility is turned over. In this section, the inspection test and maintenance

requirements for the fire alarm system and components installed in the building will be discussed.

The specific commissioning team members, activities, and level of rigor should be tailored to individual projects based on size, complexity, and the planned quality management. The requirements or guidelines in this chapter are specifically written for medium-high complexity MILCON projects. Lower levels of commissioning may be suitable for small, low complexity projects. A low complexity project is defined as a project with several small split-systems with no direct digital controls may only require

the typical USACE contractor quality control and quality assurance. However, high complex projects require higher levels of commissioning may be necessary for large, very complex projects. The subject project should be considered a high complexity project.

Commissioning requirements for Army, Air Force, and other Department of Defense facilities are outlined by UFC 1-200-02 High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements, ASHRAE Standard 189.1 Standard for the Design of High- Performance Green Buildings, and Engineering Regulation 1110-345-723 Total Building Commissioning Procedures. If a project has a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) requirement, commissioning requirements are imposed by the LEED Rating Systems. The design publications listed below should be used as sources of criteria for commissioning. The criteria from these sources may be supplemented, but not supplanted, by applicable criteria contained in nationally recognized codes, standards, and specifications.

Many of the referenced government engineer publications can be found in the Whole Building Design Guide at https://www.wbdg.org/ffc/dod. Design effort associated with the development of the design documents is typically based on all applicable requirements/criteria, including, but not limited to, the latest versions of the following. In the event any conflict is noted between any requirements/criteria, the more stringent typically applies unless specifically noted otherwise. The third-party

commissioning requirements are dependent on the third-party rating tool that is selected. In general, the testing plan documentation shall be provided in accordance with NFPA 72 Section 14.2.10. Periodic inspection and testing documentation shall be provided in accordance with NFPA 72 Sections 14.6.2 through 14.6.4. record of all inspections, testing, and maintenance as required by NFPA 72 Section 14.6.2.4 shall be documented using either the record of inspection and testing forms, NFPA 72 Figure 7.8.2(g) through Figure 7.8.2(l). The US government is generally allowed to do its own testing of the fire alarm systems after the formal Japanese systems are completed. A combination of US and Japanese testing and inspection will be done. The Japanese government must ensure that they got what they paid for. The US government must ensure that we have a safe facility.