This one is a real head scratcher.
The Mircom RAM-216 annunciator isn't designed (or even approved) for outdoor mounting.
Mircom originally verified this installation on December 21, 2001. The common control is a Mircom FA-1000 configured for sixteen zones.
The fire alarm system has since gone through some changes as evidenced by the two Verification labels from White Eagle Fire Prevention Ltd. This one is dated July 18, 2007.
This one is dated December 14, 2005.
The Mircom technician would have been using the 1997 version of the Verification Standard. This would have referenced the 1991 edition of the Installation Standard. Section 3 of CAN/ULC-S524-M91 "Requirements of Fire Alarm System":
Reference Sentence 3.1.9:
“All fire alarm system devices shall be certified by a nationally recognized certification agency for the intended use.”
You can refer to the RAM-216 installation instructions HERE.
Reference Sentence 3.1.10:
“Devices shall be located and mounted so that vibration, jarring and anticipated ambient conditions will not cause accidental operation or malfunction.”
I don't know about you, but I figure an annunciator designed for operation INDOORS mounted OUTSIDE might just fail this section.
The verifications performed by White Eagle both would have used CAN/ULC-537-04 version. The Installation Standard to which it refers would be CAN/ULC-S524-01. The remote annunciator installation is subject to Sentence 3.1.5:
“All fire alarm system devices shall be in conformance to applicable Standards (Refer to Reference Publications) for the intended use and operation.”
No matter how you slice it (or which Standard you use), this installation is STILL wrong!
Here's another interesting photograph of the same system:
It appears that none of the systems supervisory zones report (or have been programmed) as latching supervisories (reference BCBC 2006). They all came in as alarm zones. It's a darn good thing that I took the precaution of bypassing the bells before testing the circuits I anticipated were programmed as "supervisory". The reason for this was that you must ensure the remote annunciator conforms with CAN/ULC-S537-04 Section 4.5.1:
“Each annunciator required by the National Building Code of Canada, including each sequential display, where used as an annunciator, shall be inspected and tested to confirm operability, as applicable. (Refer to Appendix C5.8 Annunciator and Remote Trouble Signal Test and Inspection:)
... M Visual indicators comply with Table 3, Visual Indicators-Colour Code; ...”
But hold on, the headline to this story doesn't mention the fire alarm service company whose last three annual inspections all failed to document the fact that the back-up battery was inadequately sized to provide the requisite twenty-four hours of stand-by power (the units were 7AH when they should have been 12AH). Worse, how can one explain away their replacement of the properly sized back-up battery with one of lesser capacity (as evidenced by the inspection records they left on site) in violation of the requirements of the Testing Standard (CAN/ULC-S536-04)?
Yep! I'd say that this job definitely qualifies as our first ever "triple nomination", but as the subject of the inspections is currently being investigated by ASTTBC, I'll refrain from adding their name for the time being!
UPDATE! Apex Inspections honoured with their own Brickee! Read more HERE!