Would you have issues with this Surveyor?

Actually the reason that Kidde had a recall was that the plastic nozzles and trigger do not last 12 years much less 50 years. The plastic head assembly have been malfunctioning and in one case someone died. The metal heads do last but the non refillable extinguishers are only good for 12 years because at 12 years they are supposed to undergo hydrostatic testing and no one will do that test on a non refillable extinguisher so it becomes trash. BTW testing would cost more than a new extinguisher.

For anyone that does not know what the recall is about.


Kidde Fire Extinguisher Recall
November 2, 2017
In conjunction with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), Kidde announced a recall to replace certain Kidde fire extinguishers. The replacement program was initiated because certain fire extinguishers can become clogged or require excessive force to activate, posing a risk of failure to discharge. In addition, the nozzle can detach with enough force to pose an impact hazard. The product recall involves two styles of Kidde disposable fire extinguishers: plastic handle fire extinguishers and plastic push-button fire extinguishers.

Comodave said:

... non refillable extinguishers ... at 12 years they are supposed to undergo hydrostatic testing ...

Click to expand...

Capt Lee already corrected you on the recall error, but where did you come up with this gem? Can you cite a USCG regulation?

Nfpa 10.

The recall info that Capt Lee posted is basically what I had said. As to the 12 hydrostatic testing I cut and pasted some info on the testing and inspection. As noted dry chemical extinguishers need hydrostatic testing every 12 years. Table L-1 is from the OSHA.GOV web site. Note the 12 years after dry chemical type.


Internal Maintenance Inspection – ~ Every 5, 6, or 12 Years (depending on equipment type)
This internal maintenance also requires the services of a fire protection company. Internal maintenance testing involves discharging of the fire extinguisher and a complete internal examination and recharging to insure all components of the fire extinguisher are working correctly. Extinguishers such as the dry chemical type requiring a 12 year hydrostatic test also require a 6 year internal examination.

In addition to or as part of the internal maintenance examination, periodically the fire extinguisher cylinders must be hydrostatically tested to ensure their integrity and ability to safety contain the pressure used to expel the agent.

Typically, pressurized water, carbon dioxide, and wet chemical extinguishers need to be hydrostatically tested every 5 years. Dry chemical extinguishers need to be tested every 12 years. A complete chart of test intervals for various types of equipment can be found here.

Proper testing and maintenance of your workplace's portable fire extinguishers does more than fulfill some OSHA and NFPA requirements—it ensures the safety of your employees and your business. Is your business fully protected from all potential fire hazards? Schedule a hazard assessment today and get started toward creating a safer workplace.


Table L-1
Type of extinguishers Test interval (years)
Soda acid (soldered brass shells) (until 1/1/82) *
* Soda acid (stainless steel shell) 5
* Cartridge operated water and/or antifreeze 5
Stored pressure water and/or antifreeze 5
Wetting agent 5
Foam (soldered brass shells) (until 1/1/82) *
Foam (stainless steel shell) 5
Aqueous Film Forming foam (AFFF) 5
Loaded stream 5
Dry chemical with stainless steel 5
Carbon Dioxide 5
Dry chemical, stored pressure, with mild steel, brazed brass or aluminum shells 12
Dry chemical, cartridge or cylinder operated, with mild steel shells 12
Halon 1211 12
Halon 1301 12
Dry powder, cartridge or cylinder operated with mild steel shells 12
FOOTNOTE: Extinguishers having shells constructed of copper or brass joined by soft solder or rivets shall not be hydrostatically tested and shall be removed from service by January 1, 1982. (Not permitted)

* Although still included in Table L-1, Soda acid (stainless steel shell) and Cartridge operated water and/or antifreeze extinguishers are now obsolete. [29 CFR 1910.157]

I might smell the milk or float the eggs to see if still good a little part the expiration date. Safety equipment? Not so much.

It isn't like he made it up. The folks who made the product wanted it back. That would be good enough for me.

I'd say thanks...and be a little embarrassed I hadn't already swapped them out. But, that is just me -- and I'm really scared of burning alive!

AFAIK USCG 46 § 162.028–1 references and includes NFPA 19 by Reference.
And the FE state the expiration as 10 yrs from Mfg noted on bottom of FE.
I don't see where there is any room for interpretation re: compliance

Subpart 162.028—Extinguishers,
Fire, Portable, Marine Type
SOURCE: CGFR 60–36, 25 FR 10640, Nov. 5,
1960, unless otherwise noted.
§ 162.028–1 Incorporation by reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated
by reference into this part with the approval of the Director of the Federal
Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR part 51. To enforce any edition
other than that specified in this section, the Coast Guard must publish a
notice of change in the FEDERAL REGISTER and the material must be available to the public. All approved material is available for inspection at the
U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Design and
Engineering Standards (CG–ENG), 2703
Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE.,
Stop 7509, Washington, DC 20593–7509,
and is available from the sources listed
below. It is also available for inspection at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202–741–6030 or
go to http://www.archives.gov/
federallregister/
codeloflfederallregulations/
ibrllocations.html.
(b) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), 1 Batterymarch Park,
Quincy, MA 02169, 617–770–3000, http://
www.nfpa.org.
(1) NFPA 10, Standard for Portable
Fire Extinguishers, 2010 Edition, effective December 5, 2009, IBR approved for
§162.028–2(a).
(2) [Reserved]
(c) UL (formerly Underwriters Laboratories), 12 Laboratory Drive, P.O.
Box 13995, Research Triangle Park, NC
27709, 919–549–1400, http://www.ul.com.
(1) UL 8, Standard for Safety for
Water Based Agent Fire Extinguishers,

I believe I have heard this before...its in the CFRs....

29 CFR § 1910.157 - Portable fire extinguishers

". Dry chemical extinguishers having non-refillable disposable containers are exempt from this requirement. "

And I think that after 12 years they are to be removed from service.

NFPA 10

7.3.1.2.1.3 Nonrechargeable*fire*extinguishers shall not be*required*to comply with* 7.3.1.2.1.2*and*shall not be*hydrostatically tested*but shall be*removed*from service at a*maximum interval of 12*years from the*date*of manufacture.

Comodave said:

As to the 12 hydrostatic testing I cut and pasted some info on the testing and inspection. As noted dry chemical extinguishers need hydrostatic testing every 12 years. Table L-1 is from the OSHA.GOV web site.

Click to expand...

I am not aware of any requirement that B-1 fire extinguishers used on small craft must meet OSHA specifications. Do you have a specific cite?

Ok, I will paste something from the CG inspection department. If you don’t like that then I am done with this. If you are not willing to accept that non rechargeable extinguishers expire at 12 years then I can’t help you. We are talking about a $25 item, or so, if you don’t care enough about your passengers to replace extinguishers after 12 years then I would not want to be a passenger on your boat. I am not going to argue with you just so you can keep picking a some little point to prove you are correct. Please note at the bottom of the CG page it specifies after 12 years non rechargeable extinguishers must be replaced.

Enclosure (3) to CG-CVC Policy Letter 18-04
Marine Inspector and Examiner Compliance Guide

Task
Action
Outcome
Verify extinguisher has minimum UL rating for space it is intended to protect
Consult the applicable table in the inspection subchapter for each space required on the COI to have an extinguisher and compare with extinguishers’ label
(i.e. paint locker requires at least 40:B, if existing B-II is also rated 40:B or greater then extinguisher is compliant; if existing B-II is not at least 40:B then extinguisher is not complaint but may be retained by verifying installation &/or manufacturing date)
Extinguisher has appropriate rating for space or is grandfathered: vessel is in compliance
Extinguisher was placed in service after August 22, 2016* and does not meet minimum UL rating for space: require replacement of extinguisher with one that has appropriate UL rating
* Or January 18, 2017 for subchapter H vessels
Verify NFPA 10 compliance
(a) Monthly inspections
(b) Annual maintenance
(servicing)
(c) Re-chargeable extinguisher
maintenance performed by
certified individual/company
(d) Non-rechargeable annual
maintenance limited to scope of monthly inspections; extinguishers in service for no more than 12 years after date of manufacture
(a) & (b): review documentation & procedures related to monthly/annual inspections & maintenance (i.e. servicing) to ensure tasks are being performed IAW NFPA 10
(objective evidence may be logs, tags, servicing report, or other similar record; if records or extinguishers are suspect marine inspector may witness demonstration of procedures by crew &/or third party)
(c) review records showing third party service or vessel/company personnel conducting annual maintenance are certified in accordance with NFPA 10
(d) review records or physically inspect extinguisher to ensure non- rechargeable extinguishers are less than 12 years old from date of manufacture
(personnel conducting maintenance on non-rechargeable need not be certified)
Extinguishers are inspected monthly & undergoing annual maintenance by certified personnel IAW NFPA 10: vessel is in compliance
Extinguishers are not undergoing monthly inspection: inspect all extinguishers to verify continued serviceability and require maintenance (servicing) of any suspect (or all) extinguishers as appropriate
Extinguishers did not undergo annual maintenance: require maintenance (servicing) of all extinguishers
Personnel conducting maintenance on rechargeable extinguishers are not certified: require maintenance on all extinguisher by certified personnel
Non-rechargeable extinguisher more than 12 years old: require replacement

Comodave said:

Ok, I will paste something from the CG inspection department. If you don’t like that then I am done with this. If you are not willing to accept that non rechargeable extinguishers expire at 12 years then I can’t help you. We are talking about a $25 item, or so, if you don’t care enough about your passengers to replace extinguishers after 12 years then I would not want to be a passenger on your boat. I am not going to argue with you just so you can keep picking a some little point to prove you are correct. Please note at the bottom of the CG page it specifies after 12 years non rechargeable extinguishers must be replaced.

Click to expand...

Well at least you are finally reading the regulations and backing off from your prior claim that disposable extinguishers require hydrostatic testing. Spreading wrong information about fire safety is not a picky little point.

SoWhat said:

Well at least you are finally reading the regulations and backing off from your prior claim that disposable extinguishers require hydrostatic testing. Spreading wrong information about fire safety is not a picky little point.

Click to expand...

Edit.

Meh. Nevermind. Carry on.

Dry chemical extinguishers do require 12 year hydrostatic testing. But non rechargeable extinguishers can not be hydrostatic tested, which I said no one will do it so the extinguisher becomes trash.

healhustler said:

I recently switched my insurance carrier and had to complete a new out of water survey. The survey noted several fire extinguishers of the plastic handle type which needed to be turned over to Kidde for exchange. The surveyor told me that I had to have the fire extinguishers certified by a fire equipment company, which I did, but now the fire equipment company says that the only way my extinguishers would remain insurance certified would be with a yearly inspection costing $25 per extinguisher and $125 for the Fireboy system in the ER. That’s eight 2.5 lb.. and two 5 lb. units. I watched the inspection and it involved observing the gauge to be in the green, and then tagging each unit. $375 per year? I want my boat to be safe but I could probably save $100 or more by just replacing all but the Fireboy with Costco units on sale. Still thinking about it.

Click to expand...

Beware of so-called fire inspection companies. I own a small hotel in WA state and have had run-ins with companies who show up unannounced to inspect our fire extinguishers. They use intimidation and imply they have the authority to carry out the inspection. I only found out when I saw the invoice for $1250. They even billed for a “trip charge”...even though he showed up at our property uninvited! Well, I called them out and refused to pay. I also reported them to our local fire Dept. And to the sheriffs office. The owner of the company (and several others) is the former fire chief of a major city in our state. Safety regulations can be a slippery slope (pun intended ;-)

I take the fixed halon bottle to a fire company for yearly certification. They charge $10.00 for the inspection. The dry chemical ones you can self inspect. The problem is on the big boats where the halon bottles are plumbed into a distribution system, you can’t just unplug the sensor and carry them into a company. Those would be expensive to get certified.

Northern Spy said:

Edit.

Meh. Nevermind. Carry on.

Click to expand...

Yes you posted it awhile back...that's when I read it and put up my referencing post.

We can always count on you to point out the proper reference.

I was pretty sure the 12 year limit and no hydro...non-refillable the key description....

THANK YOU!

When buying my sailboat about 9 years ago, my surveyor said my automatic extinguishing system in my engine compartment did not meet current standards and would need to be replaced. My insurer required me to replace it. Even though I had 5 good portable extinguishers on the boat (only required 2 or 3 by USCG safety regs.). When I challenged him on this, he changed his "must replace" requirement with a "suggest replacement". He wrote up a subsequent follow up report with everything else I did based on his report and certified I completed all of the required upgrades without me having to replace the automatic system. My Insurer accepted this. Two years later I upgraded it anyway, but at least it was on my schedule when I had the money.

Fire Extinguisher

I have to say, I find the choice of words "he wrote me up" to suggest punitive actions on the part of the surveyor, like a State Trooper who might write you up for a traffic infraction. In my experience, it's anything but.

Surveyors should observe, and make note of their findings. Simply that, which is what seems to have been done.

I'll add that you could have easily had a free Vessel Safety Check (VSC) by either the USCGA or America's Boating Club (AKA, the former US Sail & Power Squadron) before the survey. It would have been noted, and you could have addressed it up front.

Go buy a new extinguisher.

ATBster
M/V Moondance
San Diego

Don’t see the problem. Don’t you hire a surveyor to identify issues, deficiencies, and safety problems that would effect the seaworthiness or value of your boat? It sounds like he did a good and detailed job of identifying a potential issue. I don’t believe he issued you a citation or fine or punished you in any way. Doesn’t sound like this was an identified issue to be corrected contingent upon insurability either.

You surveyor sounds like someone I would hire.

Nothing to do with fire extinguishers but the surveyor who did my pre-purchase survey spent half of his time telling me I "didn't want" a twin diesel 37' trawler. What I "should get" (as a woman) was a 20-something foot inboard/outboard gas engine boat. He also told me that the Cat 3208's (with less than 2000 hours) would need a complete rebuild "soon." I think his unsolicited advice actually helped me decide to buy it.

seadancer said:

Nothing to do with fire extinguishers but the surveyor who did my pre-purchase survey spent half of his time telling me I "didn't want" a twin diesel 37' trawler. What I "should get" (as a woman) was a 20-something foot inboard/outboard gas engine boat. He also told me that the Cat 3208's (with less than 2000 hours) would need a complete rebuild "soon." I think his unsolicited advice actually helped me decide to buy it.

Click to expand...

Too bad. Sorry that you had an a**hole for a surveyor. Not everyone in the boating world is like that. Glad you got the boat you wanted. Have fun and forget that a**hole.

Hi mate,

Keep your extinguisher on board, dont pay the surveyor for trying to save the life of your family, I,m sure he doesnt want to see you again any way.

Sometimes we see things that an owner wishes we didnt , it usually costs money to rectify. Shiny boat owners who dont understand the concept of planned maintenance is will usually blame the closest one. If not the surveyor, then the tradie, who he will also not pay.

We,ve all heard them moaning while holding up the bar.

This post from TOM, after his first complaint on this forum "ABYC Cite PLEASE", "Survey Findings Question? Go read them, and then come back.
IMO you hired a hack because you couldn't pass a NAMS or SAMS. This "not a surveyor" my opinion, gave you some advice on safety?

Obviously you don't care about the safety of others around you. OH you do, "Practice using radar as it could save your life." Fire extinguishers won't?

You complain about the expense of some safety items, better look at the shiny chrome horns, SAT TV dome, watermaker.

Fortunately this " inspector tried to save the lives of everyone around you". YOU are insulted and reached out for support of TF "friends". You should reassess the posting's discussing the quality of your "surveyor" and thank everyone for not calling you a "hazard!"

You spent "Fuel Costs: $7864.44" going cruising in 2019 and you bring this to the forum?

I'm with Captain Lee, YOU are making TF a waste of time! The title on TF of GURU relates to the amount of posts, not the quality or accuracy.

Why post, if you don't take the opinion of the majority and NOT what you want to hear?

YOU, "You may have lots of $$$, but some of us want what we pay for."
ME, You got what you paid for, not what YOU wanted to hear!

After cruising into places "no one else around" & 12 hours each way on the ocean, you're lucky!
Maybe this is why Crusty doesn't side tie any more?

Jimintheair3 said:

This post from TOM, after his first complaint on this forum "ABYC Cite PLEASE", "Survey Findings Question? Go read them, and then come back.
IMO you hired a hack because you couldn't pass a NAMS or SAMS. This "not a surveyor" my opinion, gave you some advice on safety?

Obviously you don't care about the safety of others around you. OH you do, "Practice using radar as it could save your life." Fire extinguishers won't?

You complain about the expense of some safety items, better look at the shiny chrome horns, SAT TV dome, watermaker.

Fortunately this " inspector tried to save the lives of everyone around you". YOU are insulted and reached out for support of TF "friends". You should reassess the posting's discussing the quality of your "surveyor" and thank everyone for not calling you a "hazard!"

You spent "Fuel Costs: $7864.44" going cruising in 2019 and you bring this to the forum?

I'm with Captain Lee, YOU are making TF a waste of time! The title on TF of GURU relates to the amount of posts, not the quality or accuracy.

Why post, if you don't take the opinion of the majority and NOT what you want to hear?

YOU, "You may have lots of $$$, but some of us want what we pay for."
ME, You got what you paid for, not what YOU wanted to hear!

After cruising into places "no one else around" & 12 hours each way on the ocean, you're lucky!
Maybe this is why Crusty doesn't side tie any more?

Click to expand...

WOW Little sensitive aren't you. If you don't like it move on. No one is forcing you to participate in TF.

That seems to always be YOUR opinion about other TF responses! It's all about YOU!!

So new fire extinguishers will be here on Thursday. Kiddie is a good company to deal with. SS does rust....

I replaced all the clamps on the Pedro hose. They were rusted and this was a good find by the surveyor. Little rough getting them off.

Installed rubber boots on the starters and windlass switches. This was a subject we talked about. I use liquid tape on all my connections, but he stated the rode could hit the positive post and go through the liquid tape, so he wanted to see protective boots.

GFIs in the two heads and kitchen are ready for install. Does anyone know if these will affect the new docks with GFI?

Batteries are secured. They are are already in a battery box. The surveyor was concerned the group 31s may slide around a bit. Easy fix.

I also have the inlet breaker on order. Thanks for the help TF on locating one that would fit my needs. It would appear that some folks still question the logic of this fix as I do.

Well off to start prepping ASD just in case they open the boarder.

ABYC allows 1” of movement for the batteries. I don’t like any movement at all since over time it can cause problems. If the box is secure and the batteries move around inside the box then I use Starboard to fill the gaps between the battery and the box. I like Starboard as a shim since battery acid will not cause Starboard to deteriorate and I can cut the Starboard to the specific size I need.

Comodave said:

ABYC allows 1” of movement for the batteries. I don’t like any movement at all since over time it can cause problems. If the box is secure and the batteries move around inside the box then I use Starboard to fill the gaps between the battery and the box. I like Starboard as a shim since battery acid will not cause Starboard to deteriorate and I can cut the Starboard to the specific size I need.

Click to expand...

Great idea.

I use Starboard for lots of things and never throw away any scrap pieces. Never know when you might need a small piece.

Along those same lines, I like boxes where the lid can be strapped down. I've got new ones to replace my engine battery boxes because the lids on the originals are only gravity mounted.


As a note, AGMs need to be secured, but not necessarily in boxes like a wet cell. My house bank sits in a hefty wooden bracket / mount with a beefy strap setup to prevent the batteries from moving. But it's not really a box.