I find it-amusing?- that I cannot get a Certif of Occ for a health club
until the local 3rd party guy has a PE seal on a plan indicating the
addition of ONE HEAD in ONE CLOSET in a fitness center tenant improvement,
being converted from a grocery store that was sprinklered to FM standards in
the 80's. He had sealed plans on the rest, but they added a closet.

But do renovations in the rather secure and controlled venue of a Federal
Courthouse, and the AHJ(s) cannot guarantee we can get code compliance. In
fact, the AHJ assumes there will be no sprinkler work done correctly, and
goes to great lengths to assure his best guess at compensating for this.

Rahe, this is not a jab at you- it's an observation that renovation work in
your buildings is pretty damn flawed. We cannot control what goes on in the
very bowels of our judicial system? Heck, a member of congress can't even
walk into the House to her office without getting stopped.

Years ago I assisted in bid prep for the Phila Fed Courthouse. We were 2nd
at (memory) 11 mil, a road paver from Dallas took it for under 7 mil. Think
he had 10 FPS and 100 SF included? 

Glc
Wouldn't it be nice if the govt would put their own house in order before
coming into mine, telling me what I should pay my employees, and -I'll step
off the soapbox now.


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 7:24 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Beyond code (was max velocity)


Well, not to increase the storm clouds further, the following needs to be
explained.

1.  Most of what I specify is part of the Facilities Standard that we build
buildings under. (pipe types, design areas, densities, etc.)
2.  I am the AHJ and the owner's representative, just as it allows in the
good book.
3.  I have to try my darndest to insure that a system will last a minimum
of 50 years, not just till the warranty runs out.
4   I am not in any way advocating the government requirements for the
private sector.
5.  These buildings are not going to change ownership or occupancy ever.
6.  My process is to insure that I have pipe that will remain large enough
to provide at least some measure of protection after 50 years of everybody
and their dog modifying and changing the sprinkler system in that period of
time.
7.  Walls will change in these buildings and preventing the sprinklers from
covering more than 130 square feet with a light hazard density will help
compensate for that.  I cannot ever guarantee that sprinklers will
accompany wall changes.  In our buildings it seldom does, leaving areas
unprotected.
8.  If you are ever on a federal jury, try to think about the fire
protection systems in a highly secured building with really bad egress.
9.  I seemed to noticed that some readers apparently feel that these
systems should be competitively bid against minimum codes as interpreted by
what they are familiar with on other projects.  We simply cannot work that
way.  Too much gets by that shouldn't.
10. This is not a bad return on the taxpayer's money.  In the private
sector, the architectural and every other trade gets more attention than
the fire protection systems.  It seems that the fire protection systems are
the red headed stepchildren to everything else.  I am trying to make this
trade better, not worse.
11.  It also appears that many think that no one deserves more than just
the bare minimum with various interpretations.  There is nothing wrong with
having something better.  Does anyone think that they deserve only the
cheapest truck or house or other things or is that reserved for the other
guy?

I do appreciate constructive criticism and comments, but lets don't let it
get beyond that.

Thank You

Rahe Loftin, P.E.



_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

Reply via email to