Re: Ammunition Manufacturer

2017-01-21 Thread MPhelps 
Hi Bill,
I think you've pointed out an obscure issue in our industry, that the 
installation of fire protection systems range from the mundane, a two story 
office building, to the exotic, a manufacturing facility for propellant milling 
and charging of automotive airbags. However, I don't believe the issue you're 
addressing, or the solution you suggest, should involve amendments to NFPA 13. 
After all, NFPA 13 " Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems" is in 
fact a Standard. Standards are not Codes.  Codes are the proper realm of 
regulation for the Engineer and engineering requirements.  I don't believe we 
should  confuse "Engineering" and the "Design Standard" for Fire Sprinkler 
Systems. I think NICET makes this differentiation very well.  IMHO

Mark at Aero
602 820-7894

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 21, 2017, at 8:00 AM, Bill Brooks 
> wrote:

Instead of something being or not being your fight, why not say “I’ve never 
done anything like this before and I am not able to provide sprinkler design 
information for this specialized facility.  However, I am very capable of 
providing a sprinkler system layout for you when your registered design 
professional provides approved construction documents.”

In my opinion, this is one of the longstanding problems (challenges) with NFPA 
13.  It totally mixes work that should be performed by the design professional 
with the work performed by the sprinkler contractor.  It’s a recurring theme of 
many posts where the sprinkler contractor/designer is “solving” problems caused 
by failure to shift the design responsibility to a design professional.

Maybe it would be a good idea to add this concept to Chapter 1.  A design 
professional determines design criteria, a sprinkler contractor does system 
layout and calculations.  It’s probably too late for the 2022 edition and 
probably too radical an idea for the committee to consider.

Back to my resting mode.

Bill Brooks

From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On 
Behalf Of John Paulsen
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 5:16 PM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Ammunition Manufacturer

They are disputing the F-1 Use Group. They contend that exception applies to 
big box stores like Dick’s Sporting Goods, not manufacturing. That’s not my 
fight, (I’m in over my head far enough as it is) I’m just trying to give the 
owner and whatever sprinkler contractor that I get involved, the right design 
criteria.

From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On 
Behalf Of Ed Vining
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 5:10 PM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Ammunition Manufacturer

​And have the State Plan Review people accepted the code review?

If the owner uses 200 pounds of propellant per day for a five day week, and if 
the code review limits are met, the owner is going to need two shipments per 
week. I'm sure the owner will feel this is burdensome.  Guess what!

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:50 PM, John Paulsen 
> wrote:
Uhh..no, it hasn’t worked that way in this case. It is a “rural” jurisdiction 
and the locals have been deferring to the State Plan Review people. (And I 
think rightfully so in this case.)

From: Sprinklerforum 
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
 On Behalf Of Ed Vining
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 4:49 PM

To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Ammunition Manufacturer

Has the AHJ bought into the code review?

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:31 PM, John Paulsen 
> wrote:
The plant machines need to have 200,000 primers and 200 lbs of powder available 
a day for manufacture. The verbiage below comes from the code review and has 
been agreed to by the owner.

Small Arms Primers
Quantities not exceeding 750,000 shall be permitted to be stored in a building 
where not more than 100,000 are stored in any one pile and where piles are at 
least 15 ft apart.
Small arms primers not stored in accordance with 14.5.6(1) through 14.5.6(2) 
shall be stored in a magazine meeting the requirements of Chapter 9.

Smokeless Propellants
Quantities exceeding 100 Lbs, but not exceeding 800 Lbs, shall 
be stored in non-portable storage cabinets having walls of at least 1” 
thickness.

But again, in your all’s opinion, is this an Ex Haz Grp I or II, or something 
else? Just trying to figure out if I’m looking at the project the right way.

Thanks,

John Paulsen – SET
Crown Fire System Design
6282 Seeds Rd.
Grove City, OH 43123
P – 614-782-2438
F – 614-782-2374
C –

RE: Ammunition Manufacturer

2017-01-21 Thread Bill Brooks 
Instead of something being or not being your fight, why not say “I’ve never 
done anything like this before and I am not able to provide sprinkler design 
information for this specialized facility.  However, I am very capable of 
providing a sprinkler system layout for you when your registered design 
professional provides approved construction documents.”

 

In my opinion, this is one of the longstanding problems (challenges) with NFPA 
13.  It totally mixes work that should be performed by the design professional 
with the work performed by the sprinkler contractor.  It’s a recurring theme of 
many posts where the sprinkler contractor/designer is “solving” problems caused 
by failure to shift the design responsibility to a design professional.

 

Maybe it would be a good idea to add this concept to Chapter 1.  A design 
professional determines design criteria, a sprinkler contractor does system 
layout and calculations.  It’s probably too late for the 2022 edition and 
probably too radical an idea for the committee to consider.

 

Back to my resting mode.

 

Bill Brooks

 

From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On 
Behalf Of John Paulsen
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 5:16 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Ammunition Manufacturer

 

They are disputing the F-1 Use Group. They contend that exception applies to 
big box stores like Dick’s Sporting Goods, not manufacturing. That’s not my 
fight, (I’m in over my head far enough as it is) I’m just trying to give the 
owner and whatever sprinkler contractor that I get involved, the right design 
criteria. 

 

From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On 
Behalf Of Ed Vining
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 5:10 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
 
Subject: Re: Ammunition Manufacturer

 

​And have the State Plan Review people accepted the code review?

 

If the owner uses 200 pounds of propellant per day for a five day week, and if 
the code review limits are met, the owner is going to need two shipments per 
week. I'm sure the owner will feel this is burdensome.  Guess what!

 

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:50 PM, John Paulsen  > wrote:

Uhh..no, it hasn’t worked that way in this case. It is a “rural” jurisdiction 
and the locals have been deferring to the State Plan Review people. (And I 
think rightfully so in this case.)

 

From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org 
 ] On Behalf Of Ed Vining
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 4:49 PM


To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
 
Subject: Re: Ammunition Manufacturer

 

Has the AHJ bought into the code review?

 

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:31 PM, John Paulsen  > wrote:

The plant machines need to have 200,000 primers and 200 lbs of powder available 
a day for manufacture. The verbiage below comes from the code review and has 
been agreed to by the owner.

 

Small Arms Primers

Quantities not exceeding 750,000 shall be permitted to be stored in a building 
where not more than 100,000 are stored in any one pile and where piles are at 
least 15 ft apart.

Small arms primers not stored in accordance with 14.5.6(1) through 14.5.6(2) 
shall be stored in a magazine meeting the requirements of Chapter 9. 

 

Smokeless Propellants

Quantities exceeding 100 Lbs, but not exceeding 800 Lbs, shall 
be stored in non-portable storage cabinets having walls of at least 1” 
thickness.

 

But again, in your all’s opinion, is this an Ex Haz Grp I or II, or something 
else? Just trying to figure out if I’m looking at the project the right way.

 

Thanks,

 

John Paulsen – SET

Crown Fire System Design

6282 Seeds Rd.

Grove City, OH 43123

P – 614-782-2438  

F – 614-782-2374  

C – 614-348-8206  

 

 

 

 

From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org 
 ] On Behalf Of Charles 
Bamford
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 4:15 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
 
Subject: Re: Ammunition Manufacturer

 

Paging Scott Mitchell..

 

On Friday, January 20, 2017 11:27 AM, "Hinson, Ryan"  > wrote:

 

How much DOT Class Division 1.1 (primer) and 1.3 (gunpowder)explosives will be 
located inside the building at any one time…and where?  What blast resistance 
requirements are required between said explosives and the rest of the building? 
  Where are explosives stored?  Have venting considerations in coordination 
with suppression activation and the impact of humidity on