Is FDC and PIV Required to be 50-ft Apart?

1/17/2024

I have a building that has both a free standing fire department connection (FDC) and a post-indicator valve (PIV) out at the drive entrance to the single-story building as requested by the Fire Marshal.

Construction has now started up for the site and the Fire Marshal is saying there is a code requirement for the PIV and FDC to be 50-ft apart and wants them moved. He is unsure of the exact distance, but he insists this is a code requirement and that it's not a local requirement.

For reference, we are under the 2015 IBC/IFC and 2013 NFPA code editions.

Is there any requirement for the PIV and FDC to be 50-ft apart?

I cannot find any requirement like this in the IBC, IFC, or NFPA 13 or 24. There are sections in both NFPA 13 and 24 that vaguely say PIVs shall be protected against mechanical damage, but they give no minimum distance from objects. IFC/IBC both list minimum 36-in clearance around the FDC.

I think the Fire Marshal might be confusing the 40ft requirement from buildings for the PIV, or, this is a local preference, but they do insist otherwise.

I know at the end of the day the Fire Marshal gets whatever they want for the PIV and FDC placement, but I really want to make sure that there is not some hidden requirement I cannot find.

Thanks in advance.

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

15 Comments

Glenn Berger

1/17/2024 08:17:35 am

NFPA 24 has a "basic" requirement of 40 feet for hydrants and PIVs from buildings. Many exceptions and deviations have been allowed.

As far as FDC, it is mostly dependant on the location of hydrants and the approach of the responding fire department. Most FDCs are located on the building wall.

Greg

1/17/2024 08:46:57 am

As illuded to in the previous comment, NFPA 24 is the Standard for the Installation of Private Fire Service Mains and Their Appurtenances. The key word here is private mains used in industrial complexes, oil & gas, nuclear, etc., as compared to a public utility service.

From my understanding of the fundamental reason for the 40 ft. plus separation is a defense - in depth strategy in the event of building collapse. There is a great deal of assumption in the concept. However, imagine an industrial building collapse where the collapse zone spreads outward from the original building footprint.

If the PIV were outside of the control zone, it allows for shut-off of the collapsed building's sprinkler system (which may now be a broken and open set of pipes). Isolation preserves precious water (volume and pressure), and within an industrial setting, a tanked water system or even an open water pump-draft station can be used more efficiently, if water is not being wasted within the collapse. The position of the FDC could have some of the same theory, although I've only been aware of the PIV distance requirements in private service.

A lessor thought for considering remoteness of PIV and FDC is for highly hazardous chemicals and some scenarios with nuclear materials. The distance from the building allows for operation to occur in an area that might be somewhat safer than a proximate location to the structure. However, in thinking from past experience, I don't recall off hand any specific requirements that would cite this this as a defined philosophy.

Dan Wilder

1/17/2024 08:58:42 am

I think he is mixing up the Collapse Zone requirements for the building (in general for personnel and apparatus) to the valves themselves, which is typically 1.5x the height of the exterior wall.

There is no specific code section that I am aware of, more good practice and SOP by a responding fire department, to a specific building construction and occupancy.

Jesse

1/17/2024 12:34:02 pm

Agree with Dan here. I think the local FM is getting a couple different things confused.

I would respectfully ask for a code reference from the FM. Its their responsibility to provide that.

Colin Lusher

1/17/2024 04:47:57 pm

This is the best answer, your AHJ is confused. There is no separation requirement between FDC and PIV.

Ivan Humberson

1/17/2024 09:04:48 am

IMHO, as a retired code official, the AHJ should be the one to provide the code section they are citing that requires this - I always stressed to my staff that anytime they required something to be changed, they needed to provide the code section reference for the requirement.

1/17/2024 10:24:28 am

great answer!

Pete H

1/17/2024 11:55:56 am

Yeah, I can't find a direct code requirement for this 50' separation.

Perhaps you can call/e-mail the AHJ and just try to ask to verify what code section he's alluding to for the purpose of your own education?

Maybe offer the 40'-0" separation of PIV's and hydrants in NFPA 24 as the closest you can find from your own research (with the appropriate code section to show you've looked into it).

Jerry Clark

1/17/2024 01:01:26 pm

Please...PLEASE! Stop saying the AHJ gets what the AHJ wants. The AHJ cannot just magically require something if it is not included in a legally adopted code or standard, PERIOD! And as stated in another response, it's on the AHJ to provide the exact code citation, not for you to try and figure out what the heck they're talking about.

Pete D.

1/17/2024 09:18:47 pm

There is a 100 ft. max requirement between the FDC and the public hydrant intended for the pumper to draw suction water from. I have seen code adoption in select jurisdictions reduce this to 50 feet. Saginaw comes to mind. Additionally, your AHJ may be confusing a PIV with a WPIV, and if the valve in reference is a WPIV, I think the FDC should fall outside of the collapse zone measured from the exterior wall, which is where WPIVs are located.

Dean Melanson

1/18/2024 02:55:48 pm

I believe that the 100 foot max distance of the FDC to hydrant is only for standpipe FDC's. I do not believe that there is any requirements for the hydrant to FDC for sprinkler systems. I cannot find anywhere that the FDC and PIV must be any distance apart. As mentioned previously it is up to the code official to give a written violation order citing the enforceable code(s) and who an appeal can be made to

Fred Walker

1/18/2024 01:25:41 pm

Normally NFPA 24 applies to “private” water distribution not municpal distribution. Most utilities use AWWA manuals. I did not see any specific separation require in the AWWA manuals I reviewed.
In response to “the AHJ gets what the AHJ wants” , it is correct the AHJ can not write code if there is a legally adopted code, but, he can make the approval process very difficult. Choose your battles.
I agree it is the AHJ responsibility to identify the relevant code citations he is using to establish the requirement.

Antonio Fernandes link

1/19/2024 08:15:16 am

Wouldn't this issues be address in the local building code or NFPA 1 or 5000? And not in NFPA 13, 24.

Franck

1/20/2024 03:13:47 am

No distance restriction for FDC. They are commonly located on the external wall (just on the other side of the sprinkler riser system), thus limiting friction losses.

PIV recommendation for 40 ft (not 50) is coming from the « old time » where industrial buildings were 30 ft high as a « general rule ».
As indicated by Dan, this is related to the expected collapse of the building and still being able to safely operate the valve.
This being said, it means that if the building is only 20 ft high, you can have some arguments to have the PIV at 30 ft 😀.
On the other side, with a 50 ft high building… well keep the 40 ft.
The good news is that modern buildings are designed to collapse internally. 40 ft is then very conservative. A concrete building is not expected to collapse (except partially with earthquake event). So the construction can also be an argument for less than 40 ft.
Additionally, 40 ft is sometimes not possible: if your site boundary is at 20 ft, for example, or if you have a road at the 40 ft distance.
In that case, I would say : put it as far as feasible. If it is 15 ft, it is better than 2 ft!
Another argument for PIV on sprinkler systems ? Wall PIV are allowed, and they are located against the wall. So a PIV located at any distance from the wall is already better than a wall PIV.

As indicated by many others: the AHJ has to mention the rules indicating where the requirement is coming from. And your duty is to give technical arguments if this is not feasible and what are the other options.

James Art, FPE

1/24/2024 01:53:21 pm

Often here in Ca, water companies insist on a Backflow,
usually near the tie in,
despite the state laws that prohibits most
(except where a cross connection or a body of water for suction)

See the following California Law excerpt 13114.7 at:
http://leginfo legislature.ca.gov/faces/ codes_ display Section.xht mi?lawCode=HSC&SectionNum=13114.7

or
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=HSC§ionNum=13114.7.&article=1.&highlight=true&keyword=backflow

But no one wants to be the one to "fight the water co", they are bigger than we each are.
(Sprinkler Organizations take note - you could help a lot of situations, make sprinklers more affordable!)

So there should be Indicating Valves there, usually two OS&Y's,
hopefully tamper supervised.

In many cases, these are near enough to small systems to act as control valves.

Q. Is there any requirement to also have a PIV?

Is FDC and PIV Required to be 50-ft Apart?

Leave a Reply.

ALL-ACCESS

SUBSCRIBE

COMMUNITY

YOUR POST

PE EXAM

FILTERS

ARCHIVES

PE PREP SERIES