Reply To: Clean Agent Suppression Systems

Latest News

Message from our Symposium Keynote Speaker Peter Katz

A message from our Symposium Keynote speaker Peter Katz Peter Katz is a Juno Award- and Canadian Screen Award-nominated singer-songwriter who has spent the past 20 years touring internationally. He has been described by many of his fans and speaking clients as “a thunderbolt for the soul”. A gifted storyteller fluent in English and French,

Read More »

Membership Renewal Reminder

OMFPOA Memberships expire at the end of each calendar year. As we have had ongoing website construction and upgrades being completed we have not removed any accounts that have yet to pay for 2023. Our membership continues to increase and we hope to have you as part of our association. This post is to serve

Read More »

HOME Forums Reply To: Clean Agent Suppression Systems

Dave BakerDave Baker

Thanks Joe for your advice and input. Yes a building permit is a definite. We work closely with our Planning and Development Division reviewing applications and drawings submitted by qualified designers/architects. However, the question originates from a qualified P. Eng.

I think I answered my own question. The real dilemma was in NFPA 75 (ref by NFPA 13). 8.1 requires these rooms to be sprinkler protected whether or not the building is sprinkler protected. There is an allowance where the building is not sprinkler protected to use CAFS in lieu of sprinklers. 8.4.1 speaks to total gaseous flooding systems protecting critical data in process in non-sprinklered rooms.

I failed to recognize the requirement in 8.1 as stand alone, if the building is sprinkler protected, the Information Technology Equipment Room mustalso be sprinkler protected. The allowance in 8.4 does not alleviate this requirement.

Thanks to all for your consideration.