Design, LLC
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 08, 2018 1:02 PM
>>
>>
>> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> *Subject:* RE: NFPA 13R - Garages - CPVC
>>
>>
>>
>> *Your description of accessible by more than one dwelling unit is exactly
>>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *MFP
> Design, LLC
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 08, 2018 1:02 PM
>
>
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* RE: NFPA 13R - Garages - CPVC
>
>
>
Behalf Of MFP Design, LLC
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 1:02 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: NFPA 13R - Garages - CPVC
Your description of accessible by more than one dwelling unit is exactly the
way I view it. But, I got shot down by the AHJ. Their response was: “What
phosphorus … or are they?
SML
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On
Behalf Of MFP Design, LLC
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 1:02 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: NFPA 13R - Garages - CPVC
Your description of accessible by more than
ck
“The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price
is forgotten.”
From: Sprinklerforum On Behalf
Of Steve Leyton
Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 1:00 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: NFPA 13R - Garages - CPVC
13. My point is on
it’s
the intent of the book and the listing to allow the CPVC.
SL
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On
Behalf Of Ben Young
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 12:49 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: NFPA 13R - Garages - CPVC
Just to
Sent:* Wednesday, August 08, 2018 10:51 AM
> *To:* b...@firebyknight.com; sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* Re: NFPA 13R - Garages - CPVC
>
>
>
> I would agree with CPVC because of the manufacturer listing. However, if
> you were using a manufacturer that did not
, 2018 10:51 AM
To: b...@firebyknight.com; sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: NFPA 13R - Garages - CPVC
I would agree with CPVC because of the manufacturer listing. However, if you
were using a manufacturer that did not have that verbiage and you were back to
your interpretation
nkler.org
<mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> ] On Behalf Of MFP
Design, LLC
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 9:57 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
<mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
Subject: NFPA 13R - Garages - CPVC
Good morning forum members. I wo
t; Travis,
>
> Based on the product listing, CPVC is appropriate.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Bob Knight, CET III
>
> 208-318-3057
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org] *On Behalf Of *MFP Design,
@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: NFPA 13R - Garages - CPVC
Good morning forum members. I would like to get your take on the concept below.
We have a building that meets all criteria to be protected per NFPA 13R (2013
edition). These buildings have garages and dwelling units on the lower floor
38B950]
From: Sprinklerforum On Behalf
Of MFP Design, LLC
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 11:57 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: NFPA 13R - Garages - CPVC
Good morning forum members. I would like to get your take on the concept below.
We have a building that meets all crite
Good morning forum members. I would like to get your take on the concept below.
We have a building that meets all criteria to be protected per NFPA 13R (2013
edition). These buildings have garages and dwelling units on the lower floor
separated from the dwelling units by a common corridor.
13 matches
Mail list logo
