Roland
ICC certification process. It may be better than nothing. I don’t do well in
hard chairs. Last one I took was 2 x 2 hour sessions. It took me about 1:30 for
each, including re-check of first answers. You need to know nothing about how
fire behavior, contribution of contents and
I have difficulty being offered but I like the idea of Roland buying me a
drink. If need be then I’ll rise to the appropriate level of indignation.
Scott’s easy. I know I can get him to buy me a drink. See you all soon.
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:15 AM Scott Futrell wrote:
> Hmmm...Hello Ray.
I would suggest that the best way forward for universal application would be
for AFSA (or anyone) to submit code change proposal for the ICC Building Code.
The proposal would be to add a specific code requirement for the Owner
Certificate. This would fit nicely into ICC Building Code section
Hmmm...Hello Ray. Long time no see.
I would encourage you to join and become involved. There are many many
offerings from SFPE for FPE's in engineering. We aren't poaching others, but as
has been pointed out there aren't enough FPE's as it is. If others are going
to specify 'fire protection
I'm with Roland on this one. I always thought SFPE, among other things, was
supposed to PROMOTE the field of fire protection engineering, not encourage
other disciplines to poach our clients. Remember, there is more to the field
of FPE than sprinklers and fire pumps.
Ain't no way I'm paying
Yep, lets be offended and raise the drink minimum (just not high enough to
hurt Monday morning.) gotta be awake for presentations on Monday morning.
Thank You
*Mark E. Eckard SET*
*Fire Protection Services, LLC*
2126 US Hwy. 41 North
Perry, GA 31069
Office: 478-987-7319 (Perry) or (770)
For the record, the SFPE does a lot of great stuff. I thoroughly enjoyed
participating in developing the original book on Performance based design for
buildings as well as other activities long ago. Without them, there would be
no registration for FPE’s. As Scott already stated, they offer
BULLSEYE. IF I could make Mark KING for the day, my advice would be:
IF engineering doc's identified the design basis for all portions of the
building, identified the available water supply, and whether said water supply
was adequate (aka does the building need a pump) then get the hell out
John,
I agree with you at least 99% with a small reservation for the unique
situations where things like a retail occupancy (think auto parts store) has 12
feet of rack storage for tires. Someone in the system needs to be responsible
(and be financially responsible, E) for the outcome. And by
I agree Mr. Drucker. As long as the project fits nicely in NFPA 13,14,20
etc, let the Nicet IV techs handle it. Let Engineers handle the issues that
need Engineering. However, Hold ANYONE accountable for poor work be it
Engineers or Nicet guys.
My only comment Roland.
Greg
From:
It’s a joke, most AHJs know that the NICET techs are doing the heavy lift and
the PE swoops in at the 11th hour affixes the signature and seal and collects
their $ 500. Lets just stop this charade and recognize the NICET techs. The
principal engineer/architect of record simply review for
11 matches
Mail list logo
