{"id":14846,"date":"2026-10-12T15:13:53","date_gmt":"2026-10-12T07:13:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/?p=14846"},"modified":"2026-10-14T11:58:25","modified_gmt":"2026-10-14T03:58:25","slug":"fire-safe-vs-fugitive-emission-valve-requirements","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/es\/blog\/fire-safe-vs-fugitive-emission-valve-requirements\/","title":{"rendered":"Fire-Safe vs Fugitive-Emission Valve Requirements: Test Scope, Qualification Evidence and RFQ Mistakes"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t<div data-elementor-type=\"wp-post\" data-elementor-id=\"14846\" class=\"elementor elementor-14846\" data-elementor-post-type=\"post\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-65e05385 e-flex e-con-boxed e-con e-parent\" data-id=\"65e05385\" data-element_type=\"container\" data-e-type=\"container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"e-con-inner\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-2e981d3f elementor-widget elementor-widget-text-editor\" data-id=\"2e981d3f\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-e-type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"text-editor.default\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n<p><style>\n.raymonvalve-blog-page{--rv-navy:#163a58;--rv-blue:#155f91;--rv-light:#f2f7fa;--rv-line:#dbe6ed;--rv-text:#2b3e4b;--rv-orange:#bd5a17;color:var(--rv-text);font:400 17px\/1.75 Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;max-width:1120px;margin:0 auto;padding:20px 18px 45px;overflow-wrap:anywhere}\n.raymonvalve-blog-page *{box-sizing:border-box}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-readable{max-width:810px;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto}.raymonvalve-blog-page h2,.raymonvalve-blog-page h3{line-height:1.27;color:var(--rv-navy);letter-spacing:-.015em}.raymonvalve-blog-page h2{font-size:clamp(25px,2.8vw,32px);margin:45px 0 19px}.raymonvalve-blog-page h3{font-size:clamp(20px,2.2vw,23px);margin:26px 0 12px}.raymonvalve-blog-page p{margin:12px 0 18px}.raymonvalve-blog-page a{color:#126192;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:3px}.raymonvalve-blog-page a:hover{color:#0b3959}.raymonvalve-blog-page strong{color:#173b57}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-eyebrow{font-size:13px;text-transform:uppercase;letter-spacing:.11em;font-weight:700;color:var(--rv-blue)}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-lead{font-size:19px;line-height:1.65;color:#213e52}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-takeaway{background:#edf5f9;border-left:4px solid var(--rv-blue);padding:17px 20px;margin:24px auto;border-radius:0 9px 9px 0}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-section{margin-top:34px}.raymonvalve-blog-page .raymonvalve-table-wrap{overflow-x:auto;-webkit-overflow-scrolling:touch;margin:21px 0 30px;border:1px solid var(--rv-line);border-radius:10px}.raymonvalve-blog-page table{width:100%;min-width:650px;border-collapse:collapse;font-size:15px;line-height:1.5}.raymonvalve-blog-page th{background:var(--rv-navy);color:#fff;text-align:left;font-weight:700}.raymonvalve-blog-page th,.raymonvalve-blog-page td{padding:12px 14px;border-bottom:1px solid var(--rv-line);vertical-align:top}.raymonvalve-blog-page tbody tr:nth-child(even){background:#f6f9fb}.raymonvalve-blog-page ul,.raymonvalve-blog-page ol{padding-left:24px}.raymonvalve-blog-page li{margin:7px 0}.raymonvalve-blog-page figure{margin:28px auto 33px;max-width:100%}.raymonvalve-blog-page figure img{display:block;width:100%;height:auto;border-radius:11px;border:1px solid var(--rv-line)}.raymonvalve-blog-page figcaption{font-size:13px;line-height:1.55;color:#5e7280;margin:10px 3px}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-source-note{background:#f7fafc;padding:16px 20px;border:1px solid var(--rv-line);border-radius:9px;font-size:15px}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-cta{margin:40px auto 25px;padding:30px 28px;color:#fff;background:var(--rv-navy);border-radius:14px}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-cta h2,.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-cta p,.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-cta strong{color:#fff;margin-top:0}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-cta a.rv-cta-button{display:inline-block;background:#fff;color:#163a58;text-decoration:none;font-weight:700;border-radius:8px;padding:12px 18px;max-width:100%;text-align:center}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-cta a.rv-cta-button:hover{background:#e8f2f8}.raymonvalve-blog-page details{border-bottom:1px solid var(--rv-line);padding:14px 0}.raymonvalve-blog-page summary{font-weight:700;color:var(--rv-navy);cursor:pointer}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-footer-note{border-top:1px solid var(--rv-line);font-size:14px;color:#5b6870;padding-top:18px;margin-top:28px}@media(max-width:640px){.raymonvalve-blog-page{font-size:16px;padding:10px 12px 28px}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-lead{font-size:17px}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-cta{padding:23px 17px}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-cta a.rv-cta-button{display:block;width:100%}.raymonvalve-blog-page th,.raymonvalve-blog-page td{padding:10px}}\n\n\/* Stage 07 responsive, focus and accessible refinements, scoped *\/\n.raymonvalve-blog-page{width:100%;min-width:0}\n.raymonvalve-blog-page .raymonvalve-table-wrap{max-width:100%;min-width:0;scrollbar-width:thin}\n.raymonvalve-blog-page .raymonvalve-table-wrap table{margin:0}\n.raymonvalve-blog-page img{max-width:100%}\n.raymonvalve-blog-page a:focus-visible,.raymonvalve-blog-page summary:focus-visible{outline:3px solid #dc7e21;outline-offset:3px;border-radius:3px}\n.raymonvalve-blog-page details summary{list-style-position:outside;padding-left:3px}\n.raymonvalve-blog-page details[open] summary{margin-bottom:10px}\n.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-cta a.rv-cta-button:focus-visible{outline-color:#fff}\n.raymonvalve-blog-page :is(h2,h3,p,li,td,th){overflow-wrap:anywhere}\n@media(max-width:640px){.raymonvalve-blog-page{line-height:1.68}.raymonvalve-blog-page h2{margin-top:34px;font-size:clamp(23px,6vw,28px)}.raymonvalve-blog-page h3{font-size:20px}.raymonvalve-blog-page .raymonvalve-table-wrap{margin:16px 0 24px}.raymonvalve-blog-page table{min-width:600px;font-size:14px}.raymonvalve-blog-page figure{margin:21px auto 25px}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-takeaway{padding:14px 15px}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-cta a.rv-cta-button{white-space:normal;overflow-wrap:anywhere}}\n@media(prefers-reduced-motion:reduce){.raymonvalve-blog-page *{scroll-behavior:auto!important;transition:none!important}}\n\n.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-source-caution{font-size:13px;color:#5e7280;margin:8px 3px 0;line-height:1.5}\n\n.raymonvalve-blog-page figure img{height:auto;display:block}.raymonvalve-blog-page figcaption{line-height:1.5}.raymonvalve-blog-page .rv-lead{max-width:810px}.raymonvalve-blog-page .raymonvalve-table-wrap{-webkit-overflow-scrolling:touch}.raymonvalve-blog-page table th{white-space:normal}\n<\/style><\/p>\n<article class=\"raymonvalve-blog-page\" lang=\"en\">\n<div class=\"rv-readable\">\n<p class=\"rv-eyebrow\">Valve testing \u00b7 Qualification evidence \u00b7 RFQ engineering<\/p>\n<p class=\"rv-lead\">Fire-safe and fugitive-emission valve requirements address different risks and cannot substitute for one another. Fire-safe qualification evaluates specified leakage and operability during and after a controlled fire test; fugitive-emission qualification evaluates external leakage through stem or shaft seals and relevant body joints under defined pressure, temperature and cycling conditions. For a valve RFQ, the decisive question is whether each test report covers the exact valve being offered. This guide compares test scope, explains qualification coverage, and shows buyers how to verify evidence and avoid costly specification gaps.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<figure><img fetchpriority=\"high\" decoding=\"async\" title=\"Engineering comparison of fire-safe and fugitive-emission valve qualification and leakage risks\" src=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/fire-safe-vs-fugitive-emission-valve-comparison.webp\" alt=\"Engineering comparison of fire-safe and fugitive-emission valve qualification and leakage risks\" width=\"1600\" height=\"900\" data-image-status=\"user-verified\" data-source-type=\"generated-concept\" \/>\n<figcaption>Concept illustration: fire-exposure qualification and fugitive-emission qualification evaluate different risks. This is not a test record.<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n<section id=\"difference\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h2>1. Fire-Safe vs Fugitive-Emission: What Is the Difference?<\/h2>\n<p>Both requirements concern leakage control, but they address different operating scenarios. A valve may have a qualified fire-resistant sealing design without the separate type-test evidence required for controlled external emissions during routine operation. Conversely, a low-emission design is not thereby qualified for a fire event.<\/p>\n<div class=\"rv-takeaway\"><strong>Buyer decision:<\/strong> When the valve datasheet requires both functions, request two traceable qualification routes. Do not accept a general \u201ccritical service\u201d claim in place of the required test documentation.<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<div class=\"raymonvalve-table-wrap\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"region\" aria-label=\"Technical comparison table 1; scroll horizontally if needed\">\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"col\">Evaluation area<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Fire-safe<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Fugitive-emission<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>Primary concern<\/td>\n<td>Leakage and integrity under prescribed fire exposure<\/td>\n<td>External emissions during specified operating tests<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Leakage paths<\/td>\n<td>Through-seat and external leakage, as applicable<\/td>\n<td>Stem\/shaft seals and applicable body joints<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Typical routes<\/td>\n<td>API 607, API 6FA, ISO 10497<\/td>\n<td>API 624, API 641, ISO 15848-1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Evidence<\/td>\n<td>Applicable fire type-test report and qualification scope<\/td>\n<td>Emission type-test report, classification and scope<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Production evidence<\/td>\n<td>Separately specified routine inspections\/tests<\/td>\n<td>Separately specified production acceptance tests<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Interchangeable?<\/td>\n<td>No<\/td>\n<td>No<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"rv-readable\">\n<h3>Different leakage paths<\/h3>\n<p><strong>Through-seat leakage<\/strong> occurs across the closure member. <strong>Stem or shaft leakage<\/strong> occurs at the dynamic sealing assembly. <strong>Body-joint leakage<\/strong> occurs at relevant static pressure-boundary joints. Routine seat tightness alone does not demonstrate external emission performance.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<figure><img decoding=\"async\" title=\"Valve leakage path schematic marking through-seat, stem or shaft, and body-joint leakage\" src=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/valve-fire-safe-fugitive-emission-leakage-paths.webp\" alt=\"Valve leakage path schematic marking through-seat, stem or shaft, and body-joint leakage\" width=\"1200\" height=\"900\" data-image-status=\"user-verified\" data-source-type=\"engineering-diagram\" \/>\n<figcaption>Engineering schematic of potential leakage paths. Simplified geometry; the actual paths depend on valve construction.<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n<section id=\"fire-testing\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h2>2. What Do Fire-Safe Valve Tests Actually Prove?<\/h2>\n<p>Fire-safe qualification evaluates defined performance during and after a prescribed fire test. It is not a promise of unlimited fire resistance or guaranteed tightness in every real-world fire. <strong>API 607<\/strong> addresses the specified scope of quarter-turn valves and valves with nonmetallic seats; <strong>API 6FA<\/strong> (Sixth Edition, dated May 5, 2026, in the API Standards Plan) provides a separate valve fire-test route. Its applicability and qualification coverage must be checked against the valve design and the project specification; API 6FA, API 607 and ISO 10497 are not automatically interchangeable. <strong>ISO 10497<\/strong> covers fire type-testing within its stated valve scope. Select the standard by valve design and the applicable owner specification, not by label alone.<\/p>\n<h3>Seat leakage, external leakage and operability<\/h3>\n<p>Depending on the governing procedure, fire testing addresses through-seat leakage, external leakage, post-fire operation and, for relevant double-seated designs, cavity overpressure relief. The test report and permitted design-family qualification rules must establish the scope of any claimed coverage.<\/p>\n<h3>Fire type testing vs routine production testing<\/h3>\n<p>A type-test report supports a defined design qualification. It does not mean every valve was subjected to a destructive fire test. Separately required production shell, seat, functional and inspection records must be specified and supplied on their own terms. For further explanation, consult Raymon Valve\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/valve-fire-testing\/\">industrial valve fire-testing resource<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Illustrative engineering scenario:<\/strong> A supplier quotes a fire-tested isolation valve but supplies a standard pneumatic actuator without fire-survivability evidence. The valve fire-test report addresses the qualified valve configuration; it does not prove the actuator, tubing or emergency-shutdown assembly will function after a fire. The purchaser should define the required package-level function and request separate evidence or an approved exception.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"fire-scope-cautions\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h3>Engineering boundary: the valve is not the whole actuated assembly<\/h3>\n<p>For ISO 10497:2022, fire type-testing covers specified soft- and metal-seated isolation valves. The standard excludes the fire-testing requirements for electric, pneumatic and hydraulic actuators. A fire-test report for the pressure-containing valve therefore does not establish that the installed actuator package, instrument tubing or shutdown function will survive a fire. Where these functions are required, specify and verify them separately.<\/p>\n<p>Reports issued under an earlier ISO 10497 edition also require careful review against that edition&#8217;s reporting provisions and the purchaser&#8217;s acceptance requirements. Do not automatically reject or accept an earlier-edition report solely because its cover page shows an older date.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"emissions\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h2>3. What Do Fugitive-Emission Valve Tests Actually Prove?<\/h2>\n<p>Fugitive-emission requirements concern external leakage from applicable stem or shaft seals and body joints during defined tests involving pressure, temperature and operating cycles. Packing design, stem finish, gland loading and valve construction can affect the result. A packing certificate alone does not qualify every complete valve fitted with that packing.<\/p>\n<h3>API 622 vs API 624 vs API 641<\/h3>\n<p><strong>API 622<\/strong> addresses packing type testing. <strong>API 624<\/strong> addresses type testing of valves with rising or rising-rotating stems and graphite packing within its scope. <strong>API 641<\/strong> addresses fugitive-emission type testing for applicable quarter-turn valves. The ISO publisher lists <strong>ISO 15848-1:2015<\/strong> as the current published edition, together with <strong>Amendment 1:2017<\/strong>; any later draft work should not be cited as an already published replacement. Packing evidence and whole-valve evidence are different documentation categories, and scope matching remains necessary.<\/p>\n<h3>ISO 15848-1 vs ISO 15848-2<\/h3>\n<p><strong>ISO 15848-1<\/strong> concerns type testing and classification for applicable isolation and control valves. The specified leakage classification, temperature and endurance qualification should be checked against the project requirements. <strong>ISO 15848-2<\/strong> addresses production acceptance testing. A type-test report cannot be substituted for a project-required production acceptance result, and vice versa.<\/p>\n<p>When specifying ISO 15848-1, state the required classification rather than requesting unspecified \u201cISO low-emission compliance.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Illustrative procurement scenario:<\/strong> Two suppliers offer graphite-packed rising-stem gate valves. One attaches a packing type-test summary; the other references a complete-valve emission type-test report. These are not interchangeable proof. Check whether the project calls for packing qualification, complete-valve qualification, or both, and record the actual tested configuration and acceptance class before evaluating price.<\/p>\n<p>For service-level specification rather than the evidence comparison alone, consult the <a href=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/low-emission-valves\/\">low-emission valves engineering framework<\/a>; the qualification report still must match the offered valve.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"emission-boundaries\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h3>Emission class is not the same as an unrestricted service guarantee<\/h3>\n<p>Under ISO 15848-1, the relevant classification and qualification conditions must be identified in the supplier&#8217;s documents. Buyers should compare the specified leakage class, endurance\/cycling qualification, temperature class and tested configuration with the project&#8217;s acceptance criteria rather than asking only for \u201cISO 15848 compliant.\u201d The publicly stated ISO 15848-1 scope excludes end-connection joints, vacuum applications, corrosion effects and radiation effects; these are separate engineering considerations.<\/p>\n<p>When ISO 15848-2 production acceptance is required, define the production population or inspection extent, test procedure, acceptance criteria, witnessing and deliverable records in the ITP. A revision project for ISO 15848-2 edition 3 is under development; that draft should not be cited as an already published edition.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"standard-applicability\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h2>4. Which Standards Apply to Different Valve Types?<\/h2>\n<p>Begin with the actual valve design. Quarter-turn ball, butterfly and plug valves may be reviewed against applicable quarter-turn qualification routes. Rising-stem gate and globe constructions require their own scope review. Control-valve emission testing may be relevant, but fire-testing applicability must be considered independently.<\/p>\n<p>For a broader overview of the governing product, testing and qualification documents, see the <a href=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/valve-standards\/\">industrial valve standards guide<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Application boundary:<\/strong> Select the standard only after confirming quarter-turn versus rising-stem construction, closure or control duty, seat and packing design, and the project-specified edition. The valve name alone does not establish test applicability. An API 6FA, API 607 or ISO 10497 document should not be treated as automatically interchangeable; verify the exact scope and purchaser acceptance route.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<figure><img decoding=\"async\" title=\"Engineering matrix distinguishing API and ISO fire testing, packing testing, emission type testing and production acceptance\" src=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/valve-fire-emission-testing-standards-matrix.webp\" alt=\"Engineering matrix distinguishing API and ISO fire testing, packing testing, emission type testing and production acceptance\" width=\"1200\" height=\"900\" data-image-status=\"user-verified\" data-source-type=\"engineering-diagram\" \/>\n<figcaption>Simplified standard-selection matrix. Confirm the current edition and complete scope before using any standard in a purchase specification.<\/figcaption>\n<p class=\"rv-source-caution\">Editorial scope note: Verify standard names, editions and applicability against the official publications; this illustration is not a qualification certificate or a substitute for the governing standards.<\/p>\n<\/figure>\n<div class=\"raymonvalve-table-wrap\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"region\" aria-label=\"Technical comparison table 2; scroll horizontally if needed\">\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"col\">Valve type<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Potential fire-test route<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Potential emission-test route<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Critical check<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>Quarter-turn ball<\/td>\n<td>API 607 \/ API 6FA \/ ISO 10497, as applicable<\/td>\n<td>API 641 \/ ISO 15848-1<\/td>\n<td>Seat and stem seals; qualification coverage<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Butterfly \/ plug<\/td>\n<td>Applicable fire-test standard<\/td>\n<td>API 641 \/ ISO 15848-1, where applicable<\/td>\n<td>Shaft\/plug sealing and tested construction<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Rising-stem gate \/ globe<\/td>\n<td>Applicable fire-test standard<\/td>\n<td>API 624 \/ ISO 15848-1, where applicable<\/td>\n<td>Stem motion, packing and bonnet joint<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Control valve<\/td>\n<td>Design-specific review<\/td>\n<td>ISO 15848-1 or applicable project route<\/td>\n<td>Dynamic sealing and package boundaries<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"rv-readable rv-source-note\"><strong>Official technical references:<\/strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.iso.org\/standard\/78853.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer nofollow\">ISO 10497:2022 \u2014 fire type-testing scope<\/a>; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.iso.org\/standard\/61441.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer nofollow\">ISO 15848-1:2015 \u2014 emission type testing and classification<\/a>; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.iso.org\/standard\/93593.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer nofollow\">ISO 15848-2 edition 3 project \u2014 under development (2015 edition remains the published predecessor)<\/a>; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.api.org\/products-and-services\/standards\/standards-plan\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer nofollow\">API Standards Plan (including API 6FA Ed. 6, 2026)<\/a>. Official scope summaries are not a substitute for the purchased governing standards, owner specifications or test reports.<\/div>\n<section id=\"qualification-evidence\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h2>5. How Should Buyers Verify Valve Qualification Evidence?<\/h2>\n<p>The important question is not whether the supplier can show a certificate cover page. It is whether the tested configuration and its permitted qualification coverage support the valve in the commercial offer. Use the traceability path: <strong>Required standard \u2192 Test report \u2192 Tested configuration \u2192 Qualification extension \u2192 Offered valve \u2192 Accepted document set.<\/strong><\/p>\n<h3>Report scope and the offered design<\/h3>\n<p>Review test report identification, applicable edition, tested construction and sealing configuration. Confirm whether the quoted size, pressure rating, body and seal materials, packing system and applicable operating envelope are supported. Any qualification-relevant design changes require evaluation under the applicable standard and project acceptance rules.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Evidence-to-offer matching:<\/strong> Request a report-to-tag matrix linking each quotation line to the qualification report identifier, tested model, relevant seat and stem\/shaft sealing arrangement, applicable size\/rating\/material extension basis, operating envelope and declared deviations. A report for one product family is useful only when the permitted qualification rules demonstrably include the offered construction.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<figure><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" title=\"Valve qualification evidence review flowchart from specified standard to offered valve configuration\" src=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/valve-qualification-evidence-verification-flowchart.webp\" alt=\"Valve qualification evidence review flowchart from specified standard to offered valve configuration\" width=\"1200\" height=\"900\" data-image-status=\"user-verified\" data-source-type=\"engineering-diagram\" \/>\n<figcaption>Example qualification-document decision path, not a substitute for project acceptance criteria.<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n<div class=\"raymonvalve-table-wrap\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"region\" aria-label=\"Technical comparison table 3; scroll horizontally if needed\">\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"col\">Check<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Evidence requested<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Risk if missing<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>Standard and edition<\/td>\n<td>Qualified test reference<\/td>\n<td>Wrong or unacceptable test basis<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Report identity<\/td>\n<td>Traceable complete report or approved extracts<\/td>\n<td>Generic \/ unrelated certificate<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Construction<\/td>\n<td>Tested configuration and relevant drawing<\/td>\n<td>Offered design differs from test specimen<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Design-family coverage<\/td>\n<td>Permitted extension and supporting rationale<\/td>\n<td>Unsupported size or rating claim<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Sealing system<\/td>\n<td>Seat, packing, stem and joint details as relevant<\/td>\n<td>Unreviewed material or configuration change<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Emission class<\/td>\n<td>Reported class and associated test conditions<\/td>\n<td>Insufficient performance for the project<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Production tests<\/td>\n<td>ITP, production test records and acceptance criteria<\/td>\n<td>Type test mistaken for unit inspection<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Deviations<\/td>\n<td>Supplier deviation schedule<\/td>\n<td>Undisclosed qualification gap<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<section id=\"evidence-gate\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h3>Evidence Gate: Match the Qualified Design to Each Quoted Tag<\/h3>\n<p>A useful supplier response is a short <strong>qualification coverage statement<\/strong> tied to each valve tag or a clearly defined set of identical tags. It should identify the test report, standard\/edition, tested valve, permitted design-family extension and each offered design feature that could affect sealing or test performance.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Example, not a qualification claim:<\/strong> An RFQ specifies a fire-safe, low-emission quarter-turn valve. Supplier A provides a fire-test report for a different seat construction and an emission report with a different packing arrangement. Supplier B provides separate reports and a documented coverage basis matching the offered construction. Both may quote the same broad standard numbers, but Supplier A requires a formal qualification clarification before technical acceptance. Neither supplier is deemed approved without review of the complete project requirements and evidence.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Do not assume:<\/strong> identical nominal size, material grade or valve family name alone establishes that a certificate covers the supplied valve. Changes in seat material, packing architecture, bonnet joint, stem geometry or operating envelope should be checked against the governing qualification rules.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Illustrative document-review scenario:<\/strong> The tested ball valve uses a particular stem seal, but the quotation lists an alternative packing system. The difference does not automatically invalidate qualification, yet it is an open technical question. Ask for the controlled drawing revision, component comparison, standard-based extension justification and purchaser disposition before releasing the order.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"rfq-mistakes\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h2>6. Seven Common Fire-Safe and Fugitive-Emission RFQ Mistakes<\/h2>\n<p>Incomplete qualification language can produce bids that appear equivalent but contain different test and documentation obligations. Seven recurring errors are listed below.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Illustrative bid evaluation:<\/strong> An RFQ says only \u201cfire safe and low emission\u201d; Supplier A includes qualification reports, while Supplier B quotes a standard valve and marks both requirements \u201ccompliant.\u201d A price comparison at this point is misleading. Issue a common clarification requiring the two standards\/editions, tested-to-offered coverage, production inspection scope and priced document deliverables from both bidders.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<figure><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" title=\"Seven common RFQ mistakes in valve fire-safe and fugitive-emission qualification requirements\" src=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/valve-fire-emission-rfq-mistakes-checklist.webp\" alt=\"Seven common RFQ mistakes in valve fire-safe and fugitive-emission qualification requirements\" width=\"1200\" height=\"900\" data-image-status=\"user-verified\" data-source-type=\"engineering-diagram\" \/>\n<figcaption>RFQ mistake-and-correction checklist for technical bid review.<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n<div class=\"raymonvalve-table-wrap\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"region\" aria-label=\"Technical comparison table 4; scroll horizontally if needed\">\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"col\">Mistake<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Why it matters<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Correction<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>\u201cFire-safe required\u201d only<\/td>\n<td>Standard and edition omitted<\/td>\n<td>State standard, edition, evidence<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>\u201cLow-emission valve\u201d only<\/td>\n<td>No class or test route<\/td>\n<td>Specify standard and classification<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>API 622 treated as valve test<\/td>\n<td>Packing is not complete-valve qualification<\/td>\n<td>Request relevant whole-valve evidence<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>One report assumed to cover both<\/td>\n<td>Different test objectives<\/td>\n<td>Review two qualifications separately<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Configuration not checked<\/td>\n<td>Quoted design may differ<\/td>\n<td>Require tested-to-offered mapping<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Type test treated as production test<\/td>\n<td>Routine acceptance unproven<\/td>\n<td>Separate production requirements<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Deviations not declared<\/td>\n<td>Bid may exclude required evidence<\/td>\n<td>Use formal deviation schedule<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<section id=\"rfq-specification\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h2>7. How to Specify Both Requirements in a Valve RFQ<\/h2>\n<p>A useful RFQ identifies the applicable requirement for each tag, names the standard and edition, describes the acceptance criteria and requests qualification coverage for the exact offered configuration. It separately defines production testing, witnessing, inspection and deliverables.<\/p>\n<h3>Example fire-safe clause<\/h3>\n<p><em>The proposed valve shall be supported by fire-safe type-test qualification evidence in accordance with the project-specified applicable standard and edition. The supplier shall identify the tested configuration, report and documented basis for coverage of the offered design. All limitations and deviations shall be declared for purchaser review.<\/em><\/p>\n<h3>Example fugitive-emission clause<\/h3>\n<p><em>Where required by the datasheet, the offered valve shall be supported by fugitive-emission qualification evidence to the specified standard, edition and classification. The supplier shall identify the sealing configuration, qualification envelope and documented coverage of the proposed valve.<\/em><\/p>\n<h3>Production testing and documents<\/h3>\n<p><em>Production tests, routine shell\/seat tests, inspection witness points, ITP and report submissions shall be stated separately. Type qualification shall not be represented as evidence that every production valve underwent the same test.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Commercial and inspection boundary:<\/strong> The RFQ should explicitly identify whether qualification reports are required at bid stage or before manufacture, who approves the test coverage, whether additional production emission testing is included, the acceptance basis for any witness\/hold points, and whether a third party must attend. State which items are included in the offered price and which trigger a priced deviation.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"rfq-deliverables\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h3>Define the Document Submission Milestones<\/h3>\n<p>RFQ documentation should distinguish <strong>bid-stage evidence<\/strong> (qualification list, report references, preliminary coverage mapping and deviations), <strong>pre-manufacture approval<\/strong> (approved datasheet, ITP and any required full test-report review), and <strong>final turnover records<\/strong> (production test results, inspection release documents and the agreed qualification evidence package). Identify which submissions are for information, approval or witness review. Do not assume every certificate is included without being listed in the document register.<\/p>\n<p>For routine shell and seat tests and their documentation boundaries, see the <a href=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/valve-pressure-testing\/\">valve pressure testing resource<\/a>; these tests do not replace fire-safe or fugitive-emission type qualifications.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<figure><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" title=\"Valve procurement RFQ checklist for fire-safe testing, fugitive emissions, qualification evidence and inspection\" src=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/fire-safe-fugitive-emission-valve-rfq-checklist.webp\" alt=\"Valve procurement RFQ checklist for fire-safe testing, fugitive emissions, qualification evidence and inspection\" width=\"1200\" height=\"900\" data-image-status=\"user-verified\" data-source-type=\"engineering-diagram\" \/>\n<figcaption>Example project RFQ field checklist. Final acceptance requirements must be confirmed by the project engineer.<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n<section id=\"bid-normalization\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h3>Technical Bid Normalization: Record More Than \u201cComply\u201d<\/h3>\n<p>For each requirement, ask suppliers to complete one line with <strong>required standard and class<\/strong>, <strong>offered test route<\/strong>, <strong>report ID<\/strong>, <strong>tested-to-offered coverage<\/strong>, <strong>production inspection included<\/strong>, <strong>documents included<\/strong> and <strong>deviation\/clarification<\/strong>. This separates a test claim from an auditable deliverable.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<div class=\"raymonvalve-table-wrap\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"region\" aria-label=\"Technical comparison table 5; scroll horizontally if needed\">\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"col\">Bid check<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Supplier response required<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Acceptance gate<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>Fire-safe<\/td>\n<td>Standard\/edition, test report, coverage statement<\/td>\n<td>Applies to quoted tag and construction<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Fugitive emissions<\/td>\n<td>Standard\/edition, class or test basis, report and coverage<\/td>\n<td>Specified emission requirement demonstrated<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Production inspection<\/td>\n<td>ITP, test extent, criteria, hold\/witness points<\/td>\n<td>Included in quotation and deliverables<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Exceptions<\/td>\n<td>Numbered deviation register with resolution status<\/td>\n<td>All critical exceptions closed before PO<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<section id=\"po-review\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h2>8. What Should Be Confirmed Before Purchase Order Approval?<\/h2>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Confirm the requirement by valve tag:<\/strong> fire-safe, fugitive-emission, or both.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Confirm applicability:<\/strong> selected standards, editions, valve types and classes.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Match qualification evidence:<\/strong> tested design and permitted coverage against the offer.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Separate production acceptance:<\/strong> ITP, inspection, testing, witness and records.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Close deviations:<\/strong> outstanding technical and commercial exceptions before approval.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Qualification and inspection requirements may change design choice, supporting documentation, cost and schedule. Reviewing the evidence before order placement is preferable to discovering a qualification gap at final inspection. A broader overview of valve types is available in the <a href=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/industrial-valve-manufacturer-product\/\">industrial valve products guide<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Release decision:<\/strong> Where the evidence does not establish required coverage, mark the technical evaluation <em>Clarification Required<\/em> rather than silently accepting a certificate. A formally approved deviation, different qualified design or further testing may be necessary. The responsible project engineer and purchaser determine acceptance under the applicable specification.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"faqs\" class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h2>9. Frequently Asked Questions<\/h2>\n<details>\n<summary>Is a fire-safe valve automatically qualified for fugitive emissions?<\/summary>\n<p>No. The qualifications address different operating scenarios and leakage risks. Request separate evidence whenever both requirements are specified.<\/p>\n<\/details><details>\n<summary>What is the difference between API 607 and API 641 testing?<\/summary>\n<p>API 607 addresses fire testing within its stated valve scope. API 641 addresses fugitive-emission type testing of applicable quarter-turn valves. One does not establish the other qualification.<\/p>\n<\/details><details>\n<summary>Does an API 622 packing test qualify the complete valve?<\/summary>\n<p>No. API 622 concerns packing type testing. A whole-valve fugitive-emission requirement needs evidence appropriate to the applicable valve testing standard.<\/p>\n<\/details><details>\n<summary>What is the difference between ISO 15848-1 and ISO 15848-2?<\/summary>\n<p>ISO 15848-1 concerns type qualification and classification. ISO 15848-2 concerns production acceptance testing. They serve different evidence functions.<\/p>\n<\/details><details>\n<summary>Can one fire-safe report cover different valve sizes and classes?<\/summary>\n<p>Only where the applicable standard permits qualification extension and supporting documents establish the specific coverage. Do not assume all models in a supplier&#8217;s range are covered.<\/p>\n<\/details><details>\n<summary>What should buyers request when both requirements apply?<\/summary>\n<p>Request each applicable qualification report, standard and edition, tested and offered configurations, coverage basis, applicable emission class, required production tests and declared deviations.<\/p>\n<\/details><\/section>\n<section class=\"rv-readable rv-section\">\n<h2>Conclusion: Treat Each Requirement as an Independent Qualification Decision<\/h2>\n<p>Fire-safe and fugitive-emission requirements should be specified and verified independently. A meaningful technical bid review matches qualification reports to the offered valve, identifies what a standard does and does not cover and separates design type testing from production acceptance. The final decision depends on the approved project datasheet, applicable standards and documented supplier evidence.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section class=\"rv-cta rv-readable\" aria-label=\"Request qualification and testing review\">\n<h2>Request Testing and Qualification Evidence Review<\/h2>\n<p>Send the valve type and tag, medium, design pressure and temperature, size\/class, sealing construction, specified fire-safe and fugitive-emission standard and edition, required emission class, production test scope and documentation expectations. Product-specific qualification and testing availability require confirmation from the actual supplier records.<\/p>\n<a class=\"rv-cta-button\" href=\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/contact\/\">Submit Your Valve Datasheet \/ RFQ \u2192<\/a><\/section>\n<p class=\"rv-readable rv-footer-note\"><strong>Engineering note:<\/strong> This article provides preliminary qualification and RFQ guidance, not a product certification statement. No certificate, report number, customer project or test result is claimed for a specific Raymon Valve model. Images are illustrative engineering concepts, not actual qualification reports.<\/p>\n<\/article>\n<p><script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"TechArticle\",\"headline\":\"Fire-Safe vs Fugitive-Emission Valve Requirements: Test Scope, Qualification Evidence and RFQ Mistakes\",\"description\":\"Compare fire-safe and fugitive-emission valve test scope, qualification evidence, API\/ISO applicability, and RFQ mistakes for supplier approval.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/blog\/fire-safe-vs-fugitive-emission-valve-requirements\/\"},\"author\":{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"name\":\"Raymon Valve Technical Content Team\"},\"publisher\":{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"name\":\"Raymon Valve\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/\"},\"image\":\"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/fire-safe-vs-fugitive-emission-valve-comparison.webp\"}<\/script><script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"FAQPage\",\"mainEntity\":[{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Is a fire-safe valve automatically qualified for fugitive emissions?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"No. The qualifications address different operating scenarios and leakage risks. Request separate evidence whenever both requirements are specified.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"What is the difference between API 607 and API 641 testing?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"API 607 addresses fire testing within its stated valve scope. API 641 addresses fugitive-emission type testing of applicable quarter-turn valves. One does not establish the other qualification.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Does an API 622 packing test qualify the complete valve?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"No. API 622 concerns packing type testing. A whole-valve fugitive-emission requirement needs evidence appropriate to the applicable valve testing standard.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"What is the difference between ISO 15848-1 and ISO 15848-2?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"ISO 15848-1 concerns type qualification and classification. ISO 15848-2 concerns production acceptance testing. They serve different evidence functions.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Can one fire-safe report cover different valve sizes and classes?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Only where the applicable standard permits qualification extension and supporting documents establish the specific coverage. Do not assume all models in a supplier's range are covered.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"What should buyers request when both requirements apply?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Request each applicable qualification report, standard and edition, tested and offered configurations, coverage basis, applicable emission class, required production tests and declared deviations.\"}}]}<\/script><\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Valve testing \u00b7 Qualification evidence \u00b7 RFQ engineering Fire-safe and fugitive-emission valve requirements address different risks [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"disabled","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"set","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14846","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14846","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14846"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14846\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14875,"href":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14846\/revisions\/14875"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14846"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14846"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/raymonvalve.com\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14846"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}