fire suppression update question

[Black Valkyrie]

Surveyor stated that my engine bay halon system needs a recert but then stated I need to replace it with FM200. Is there a drop in replacement for this? Can't I just get a new tag? System shows armed and full charge still.

 

[ttmott]

Those fire bottles are certified by weight not what the gauge shows. It could be quite empty yet still the gauge will be in the green due to it's contents vapor pressure (much like liquid propane).
Have Cintas or whomever is in your area test and recertify the system. If it is low in weight then your only reasonable option is to update with the new style suppressant. If the weight is within specification then continue to use. I had mine done in 2019 - I think it was aground $500 US.

 

[Haden]

Those fire bottles are certified by weight not what the gauge shows. It could be quite empty yet still the gauge will be in the green due to it's contents vapor pressure (much like liquid propane).
Have Cintas or whomever is in your area test and recertify the system. If it is low in weight then your only reasonable option is to update with the new style suppressant. If the weight is within specification then continue to use. I had mine done in 2019 - I think it was aground $500 US.

I was quoted almost $800. You will wish you paid to have it serviced, if it prevents your boat/yacht from burning to the waterline.

 

[Golfman25]

I believe the replacements are like 3 boat bucks or something. Finding someone to certify might be a trick. My marina has it on their price list for a few hundred bucks.

 

[Sidewinder770]

We get ours certified every year when it's in winter storage. They have a company come in and certify anyone that wants\needs it all on 1 day. It cost us $60 to get it certified but probably because they do dozens of them in one place on 1 day.

 

[Haden]

Halon system is completely different than your average “Lowe’s” extinguishers.

 

[Fred]

I’m curious. Although a built in halon type system is preferable, I thought from a legal standpoint a few additional handhelds could make up for it.

 

[Haden]

I’m curious. Although a built in halon type system is preferable, I thought from a legal standpoint a few additional handhelds could make up for it.

Not from what I was told by two different companies. Your comparing apples to oranges. The extinguishing power of Halon can not be matched by an average handheld. If I am wrong, someone please correct me, but that is the “professional” info I was given. One company said an insurance claim might be a problem if you can not prove a working halon system. A certificate would carry a lot of weight. As for me, I’m not taking any chances. I would hate to know my wife and kids suffered from an accident, because I was trying to save paper money. That is just my thinking on the issue.

 

[Fred]

http://wow.uscgaux.info/Uploads_wowII/054-20-02/CG_Updates_Fire_Extinguishers.pdf

 

[Pirate Lady]

I was told Halon or whatever is used now puts out a fire before you even know it’s happening. No Chicago Fire guy here so i dont know.

 

[Black Valkyrie]

Have found two local companies that certify halon. Further checked the regs (at least in Canada) and vessels equipped with halon 1994 and prior can keep and maintain them. Awaiting quotes.

 

[Black Valkyrie]

Looks like the Fireboy systems are relatively inexpensive should the certification people lose their minds price wise

 

[Spark600]

I’m curious. Although a built in halon type system is preferable, I thought from a legal standpoint a few additional handhelds could make up for it.

I just bought a 2015 410 and it has 6 handheld extinguishers and I was told at the survey that with 6 handheld extinguishers the Coast Guard would not want to see the automatic extinguisher in the engine room, Not sure how true this is.
Don't get me wrong I am a safety person, the more the better.

 

[hughespat57]

here we go again....
Speaking for the USA, if you have a Halon system it can be maintained and it is "legal" and very effective agent.
If you can't get someone to "re-certify" it, just weigh it and visually inspect for damage or corrosion.
For CG regulations if you have the proper number of portables the installed is just extra.


The long answer....
Much miss-information about Halon and FM200 (which is not yet "banned") fire extinguishing systems, particularly when speaking of "legality".
It is only "illegal" to manufacture these agents as they have a chlorine component. Quite literally there are millions of pounds still "in use". It is a very effective agent that causes no harm to equipment so very popular in data centers, ships and other large installations. Because they are primarily a closed system that rarely leak there is no "legal" requirement to replace existing systems. It is recovered from decommissioned system and recycled for Halon based systems that need recharging.

The only legal requirement for a US boater is to carry enough extinguishers. The fixed system counts if you have it inspected and tagged. If you need it refilled it can be done just google Halon recharge. You dont have a location listed in your profile so just find one near you.

quoting myself from another thread:
http://www.clubsearay.com/index.php...ne-bay-fire-extinguisher.101643/#post-1177649

"The fixed system as has been stated Halon is no longer manufactured, but if serviceable is no problem and is a very effective agent. I have two, one OEM and I added a second bottle bought used in the opposite corner of my ER.

If you have sufficient portables to meet the minimum legal requirements for extinguishers on board there is no law that says you must replace the Halon system or must have it inspected professionally. I simply weigh mine each year and keep them. I have well more than the minimums in portables."

 

[Haden]

here we go again....
Speaking for the USA, if you have a Halon system it can be maintained and it is "legal" and very effective agent.
If you can't get someone to "re-certify" it, just weigh it and visually inspect for damage or corrosion.
For CG regulations if you have the proper number of portables the installed is just extra.


The long answer....
Much miss-information about Halon and FM200 (which is not yet "banned") fire extinguishing systems, particularly when speaking of "legality".
It is only "illegal" to manufacture these agents as they have a chlorine component. Quite literally there are millions of pounds still "in use". It is a very effective agent that causes no harm to equipment so very popular in data centers, ships and other large installations. Because they are primarily a closed system that rarely leak there is no "legal" requirement to replace existing systems. It is recovered from decommissioned system and recycled for Halon based systems that need recharging.

The only legal requirement for a US boater is to carry enough extinguishers. The fixed system counts if you have it inspected and tagged. If you need it refilled it can be done just google Halon recharge. You dont have a location listed in your profile so just find one near you.

quoting myself from another thread:
http://www.clubsearay.com/index.php...ne-bay-fire-extinguisher.101643/#post-1177649

"The fixed system as has been stated Halon is no longer manufactured, but if serviceable is no problem and is a very effective agent. I have two, one OEM and I added a second bottle bought used in the opposite corner of my ER.

If you have sufficient portables to meet the minimum legal requirements for extinguishers on board there is no law that says you must replace the Halon system or must have it inspected professionally. I simply weigh mine each year and keep them. I have well more than the minimums in portables."

I agree with you!!

 

[ttmott]

here we go again....
Speaking for the USA, if you have a Halon system it can be maintained and it is "legal" and very effective agent.
If you can't get someone to "re-certify" it, just weigh it and visually inspect for damage or corrosion.
For CG regulations if you have the proper number of portables the installed is just extra.


The long answer....
Much miss-information about Halon and FM200 (which is not yet "banned") fire extinguishing systems, particularly when speaking of "legality".
It is only "illegal" to manufacture these agents as they have a chlorine component. Quite literally there are millions of pounds still "in use". It is a very effective agent that causes no harm to equipment so very popular in data centers, ships and other large installations. Because they are primarily a closed system that rarely leak there is no "legal" requirement to replace existing systems. It is recovered from decommissioned system and recycled for Halon based systems that need recharging.

The only legal requirement for a US boater is to carry enough extinguishers. The fixed system counts if you have it inspected and tagged. If you need it refilled it can be done just google Halon recharge. You dont have a location listed in your profile so just find one near you.

quoting myself from another thread:
http://www.clubsearay.com/index.php...ne-bay-fire-extinguisher.101643/#post-1177649

"The fixed system as has been stated Halon is no longer manufactured, but if serviceable is no problem and is a very effective agent. I have two, one OEM and I added a second bottle bought used in the opposite corner of my ER.

If you have sufficient portables to meet the minimum legal requirements for extinguishers on board there is no law that says you must replace the Halon system or must have it inspected professionally. I simply weigh mine each year and keep them. I have well more than the minimums in portables."

Hughespat57 - not completely accurate - many of our vessels fall into 46CFR Subchapter T in which a fixed suppression system including automatic equipment shutdown is required. Sea Ray as well as most other vessel manufacturers are compliant to the CFR for a variety of reasons including vessel use, insurability, and safety. It would be empirically stupid to not service / certify or remove a fixed suppression system even if the vessel didn't fall under the CFR and expect to extinguish an engine room fire with a hand held extinguisher. In an event like this the hand held unit would be best served to enable egress from the boat. Can you imagine an oxygen starved fire in an engine room then open the hatch and introduce the needed oxygen to use a hand held extinguisher?

 

[Fred]

Hughespat57 - not completely accurate - many of our vessels fall into 46CFR Subchapter T in which a fixed suppression system including automatic equipment shutdown is required. Sea Ray as well as most other vessel manufacturers are compliant to the CFR for a variety of reasons including vessel use, insurability, and safety. It would be empirically stupid to not service / certify or remove a fixed suppression system even if the vessel didn't fall under the CFR and expect to extinguish an engine room fire with a hand held extinguisher. In an event like this the hand held unit would be best served to enable egress from the boat. Can you imagine an oxygen starved fire in an engine room then open the hatch and introduce the needed oxygen to use a hand held extinguisher?

Thank You for that clarity !

 

[hughespat57]

Hughespat57 - not completely accurate - many of our vessels fall into 46CFR Subchapter T in which a fixed suppression system including automatic equipment shutdown is required. Sea Ray as well as most other vessel manufacturers are compliant to the CFR for a variety of reasons including vessel use, insurability, and safety. It would be empirically stupid to not service / certify or remove a fixed suppression system even if the vessel didn't fall under the CFR and expect to extinguish an engine room fire with a hand held extinguisher. In an event like this the hand held unit would be best served to enable egress from the boat. Can you imagine an oxygen starved fire in an engine room then open the hatch and introduce the needed oxygen to use a hand held extinguisher?

comon now, apples and oranges, I'm ex CG I used to inspect vessels for 46CFR Subchapter T.
That's charter and passenger for hire use. i.e. COMMERCIAL rules, this is a recreational use site. Of course commercial rules are more stringent.

Did you read my last paragraphs? I have TWO halon bottles in my engine room. I believe in keeping them, I believe in weighing them annually. But I don't need to pay for a pretty tag to keep the CG happy.

 

[ttmott]

comon now, apples and oranges, I'm ex CG I used to inspect vessels for 46CFR Subchapter T.
That's charter and passenger for hire use. i.e. COMMERCIAL rules, this is a recreational use site. Of course commercial rules are more stringent.

Did you read my last paragraphs? I have TWO halon bottles in my engine room. I believe in keeping them, I believe in weighing them annually. But I don't need to pay for a pretty tag to keep the CG happy.

It applies to hired captains on a vessel as well as vessels chartered also which is commonplace for our boats. I don't think it is apples to oranges as it appears.
It is interesting that the squadron safety inspection I have done every year only looks to see that the extinguishing equipment is present and the gauges are in the green but my insurance carrier mandates certification every five years.

 

[jake88]

Do we need to keep the automatic system to be legal with CG, or just buy more handheld? system was installed in 1998 and has never been serviced or certified. We have the boat now and wondering what to do, we cannot find anyone who will inspect or certify.