Find every place the drawings state water supply test data, then confirm the test date, hydrant locations, and recorded values match across the civil, fire protection, and calculation documents. AI can flag conflicts; the fire protection engineer and the water purveyor decide what supply to use.
What does NFPA 291 cover?
NFPA 291 is the Recommended Practice for Water Flow Testing and Marking of Hydrants. NFPA describes it as guidance on fire flow tests and marking of hydrants to determine and indicate the relative available fire service water supply from hydrants and to identify possible deficiencies that could be corrected to ensure adequate fire flows.
NFPA’s official NFPA 291 page identifies the 2025 edition as current when checked on October 3, 2026. Confirm the edition, local amendments, and project scope that actually govern the work. The publisher’s newest edition does not establish local adoption.
NFPA 291 is a recommended practice about testing and marking hydrants, not a design standard for the building. The test data feed the designs reviewed under the NFPA 13, NFPA 14, and NFPA 24 guides, so this review checks that every document uses the same data.
Collect every place the supply data appear
Bring the flow test report from the water purveyor or tester, the civil utility plan with the test and flow hydrants, the fire protection drawings and their water supply notes, the hydraulic calculation summary, the fire pump drawings where a pump is used, and the specifications that state the supply basis.
Record the test date and who performed it. Data copied from an earlier project phase, or from a test at a different hydrant, often survive on one sheet after another is updated.
Compare the supply data everywhere it is copied
| Review question | Sources to compare | Decision to record |
|---|---|---|
| Test record | Flow test report, specifications, design notes | Confirm every document cites the same test and date. |
| Hydrant locations | Civil utility plan, test report, fire protection site plan | Match the test and flow hydrants to their drawn locations. |
| Recorded values | Fire protection notes, hydraulic summary, test report | Identify sheets whose supply values differ from the report. |
| Supply connection | Civil plan, fire service main drawings, riser diagram | Confirm the building connects to the main the test describes. |
| Fire pump basis | Fire pump drawings, hydraulic summary | Check that a pump design uses the same supply data as the sprinkler design. |
| Test age | Test report, project schedule, purveyor letters | Ask whether the test is still accepted where it predates later work on the main. |
Carry supply questions into the NFPA 20 fire pump guide and the sprinkler document checklist.
Example: two different flow tests on one set
Hypothetical example. The sprinkler drawings’ water supply note cites a flow test from an earlier date at a hydrant north of the site, while the hydraulic calculation summary uses a later test at a hydrant on a different street. The civil plan shows only the second hydrant.
The sprinkler water supply note and the hydraulic calculation summary cite different flow tests and hydrants. Please confirm which test is the design basis and revise the other document.
The fire protection engineer confirms the governing test and updates the note or reruns the calculation. Which supply to use is the engineer’s and purveyor’s decision.
Check water supply data with Groundbook
Upload the current project PDFs and relevant specifications to Groundbook. Identify the governing issues and add the applicable NFPA 291 reference from a copy you are licensed to use, where the license permits uploading it. State the edition, amendments, review area, and known exclusions in your instructions.
Compare the flow test report with the civil utility plan, fire protection water supply notes, hydraulic calculation summary, fire pump drawings, and specifications. Flag test dates, hydrant locations, and recorded supply values that differ between sources. Use the supplied NFPA 291 reference where applicable and cite both sources.
Groundbook links each potential finding to the documents behind it. It compares the values written on the documents; it does not judge whether the supply is adequate.
Document review does not perform or witness a flow test, analyze supply adequacy, or run hydraulic calculations. Those remain with the fire protection engineer, the tester, and the water purveyor.