To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
I can understand both sides of the issue but would have to agree with Rod.
If the contractor is licensed it gives a better point of accountability.
When the installer is licensed and screws up a guy making $5-$8
I have never run a contracting firm, but the whole issue of licensing
includes not just fitters and contractors, but engineers, designers
and even driving. Most licenses can only be obtained after a certain
skill level is reached and demonstrated. This gives us a benchmark on
how to judge a
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd Williams
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 7:22 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California - Licensing
I have never run a contracting firm, but the whole issue of licensing
includes not just fitters
] On Behalf Of Todd Williams
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 7:22 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California - Licensing
I have never run a contracting firm, but the whole issue of licensing
includes not just fitters and contractors, but engineers
...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 11:28 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California - Licensing
In Washington we got the licensing crammed down our throats but the
administration is in the hands of the State FM. Everyone
Wa is granddathering in with proof of experience for a limited time.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Ron Greenman rongreen...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 10:27:35
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
And how many times have I shook my head over what FPEs and PEs and Contractors
and designers and inspectors and plans reviewers and on and on have put out on
the street for bid, for review for construction etc. I've lost count.
You can't lump any one group by name into the realm of
Of Ron Greenman
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 10:28 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California - Licensing
In Washington we got the licensing crammed down our throats but the
administration is in the hands of the State FM. Everyone will be
tested as well
, 2009 12:04 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California - Licensing
The CA Chapters of AFSA are working on a new bill for our State. If anyone
would like a draft, shoot me an email directly and I will forward a copy. I
also have a copy of the CA
: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Rod DiBona
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 11:24 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California - Licensing
Hi Terri,
I would sure appreciate a copy
, February 23, 2009 1:45 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California - Licensing
One of the biggest problems I HAVE WITH Lic. of fitter's is, where is the
accountability?
Dev. Colo.Spg. And Fort Collins require lic. fitters on their projects, and
the state
@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California - Licensing
We have had owner and fitter licensing in Ohio for over 15 years. This is
primarily due to a high demand for a sprinkler retrofit law of Nursing homes
that every plumber and mechanical contractor was installing. The plans
@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California - Licensing
Forest,
Washington isn't grandfathering at all. To maintain business
continuity people already working in the trade and able to prove hours
are being issued temporary certifications. Those certifications are
good for one year
. And way too pervasive.
glc
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of
craig.pr...@ch2m.com
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 1:57 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential
: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Chris
Cahill
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 2:07 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
Here's where my friends Steve, George and Ryan and I disagree
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
I'm only going to speak to a couple of the many valid points raised in
your mail. Using a single large residential plumbing contractor as an
example, most have large shops where they're already doing sub-assembly
Rapid Fire
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Forest
Wilson
Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 1:33 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
the
residential market.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Rod DiBona r...@rapidfireinc.com
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 14:54:59
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
Well Forest I respect everybody's right to have
Forest is right Ron, I didn't get the impression he was pro-union, just
pro-license.
Plumbing licenses have been around longer than sprinkler licenses. I'm
sorry to say and not to offend anyone but I've always considered sprinkler
systems to be plumbing system. We're just specialists.
Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Forest
Wilson
Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 3:29 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
I'm not saying be pro-union. I'm saying
, but around in
awareness. --James Thurber
From: Rod DiBona r...@rapidfireinc.com
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 3:59:45 PM
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
I know you are not specifically saying to be pro union
PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
Great discussion. I'm not going to make any friends on this forum with
my comments on this, but I do believe multi-purpose systems are the
future of 13D residential fire sprinkler systems. Code requirements
@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
For the sprinkler contractors who don't hold a plumbing license: if
there is
no BFP, then the entire sprinkler system is potable. That's work you no
longer have access to. Does that raise any eyebrows?
Ed Kramer
Littleton, CO
To address
...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 7:13 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
For the sprinkler contractors who don't hold a plumbing license: if
there is
no BFP, then the entire sprinkler system is potable. That's
Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 8:09 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
Never mind raising eyebrows, how is our
, February 20, 2009 8:40 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
Are plumbing designers going to start doing hydraulic calculations?
At 11:09 AM 2/20/2009, you wrote:
Never mind raising eyebrows, how is our industry going to find the
thousands of design
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 11:14 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
Why not? Why wouldn't
Consulting
San Diego, CA
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 7:13 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
. It's just math, right?
Didn't Bernie Madoff say that?
Todd G. Williams, PE
Fire Protection Design/Consulting
Stonington, Connecticut
www.fpdc.com
860.535.2080
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Start?
Todd, they've been doing them for 20 years.
George Church
I don't know for sure, Todd, but if the homeowner can do it using that
simplified form in NFPA-13D, then I don't think the plumbing designers
should have too much difficulty. It's just math, right?
--
PARSLEY CONSULTING
Ken
Of Todd
Williams
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 9:58 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
. It's just math, right?
Didn't Bernie Madoff say that?
Todd G. Williams, PE
Fire Protection Design/Consulting
Stonington, Connecticut
www.fpdc.com
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd
Williams
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 9:58 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
. It's just math, right?
Didn't Bernie Madoff say that?
Todd G. Williams, PE
Fire Protection
Watt
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 4:01 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
To address the issue of backflow prevention, one discussion the
committee is having is the viability of placing a toilet on the
hydraulic end of the sprinkler
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
Never mind raising eyebrows, how is our industry going to find the
thousands of design tech's and literally dozens of thousands of
installers necessary to serve this market? Plumbing contractors are
going to start doing this work- both conventional
I'VE REQUESTD MY 1.6 Billon of TARP, and am just waiting for the check. When
it comes I'll buy pie for all of you!
Happy weekend!
Thom McMahon, SET
Firetech, Inc.
2560 Copper Ridge Dr
P.O. Box 882136
Steamboat Springs, CO 80488
Tel: 970-879-7952
Fax: 970-879-7926
sure you get your piece of
Good luck. The biggest one I can find on the shelf out here is 50' x 100'.
At 06:16 PM 2/20/2009, you wrote:
I'VE REQUESTD MY 1.6 Billon of TARP, and am just waiting for the check. When
it comes I'll buy pie for all of you!
Happy weekend!
Thom McMahon, SET
Firetech, Inc.
2560 Copper Ridge
To address the issue of backflow prevention, one discussion the
committee is having is the viability of placing a toilet on the
hydraulic end of the sprinkler system ...
Great. Now I have to learn to install toilets. Will this function as the
inspectors test too? Won't the alarm sound whenever
Gee, a green idea.
I wonder if they could find a flush valve that could be set for 60 seconds,
or whatever..
almost Friday (and almost Baseball season).
FGOL
To address the issue of backflow prevention, one discussion the
committee is having is the viability of placing a toilet on the
hydraulic
: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Thomas
Watt
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 6:01 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
To address the issue of backflow prevention, one
] On Behalf Of Thomas
Watt
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 4:01 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
To address the issue of backflow prevention, one discussion the
committee is having is the viability of placing a toilet on the
hydraulic end
, February 19, 2009 4:25:29 PM
Subject: RE: Residential systems in California
There is a good possibility these types of systems will become common,
maybe not the most common but there will definitely be markets. These
are usually the PEX piping systems but not always. If they can eliminate
the BFP
17:52:54
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
Well its good to know that potter signal has information regarding how much
water a toilet uses. Especially when there are high flow toilets and low flow
toilets and even high volume. Its nice to know
Also the PHCC promotes this.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Forest Wilson cherokeefire...@aol.com
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 02:12:16
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
I can answer the license question
For the sprinkler contractors who don't hold a plumbing license: if there is
no BFP, then the entire sprinkler system is potable. That's work you no
longer have access to. Does that raise any eyebrows?
Ed Kramer
Littleton, CO
To address the issue of backflow prevention, one discussion the
@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Residential systems in California
I can answer the license question. In oregon, where wirsbo systems are installed, you must be a licensed plumber.
The plumbers union promotes this.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Jay Jay
45 matches
Mail list logo
