How about continue design so you don't lose your schedule, but advise you are proceeding LH per their direction, and revisions will be a CO.
Can't you just ask the insur AHj to specify their criteria? Even a telecom can be turned into a letter-in-reverse w/cc to A/E (or whomever your contract is with) and note the requirement, confirm they want you to continue as you've advised you would, on the basis of entire building LH. If its #13, and I'd assume it would be, then the "sub-occupancies" would be treated appropriate to their risk. Doesn't your state building code require #13 as a minimum? If design criteria were up to the owners maybe we could have installed that system in a mattress place that kept having "hot buns" flaming up as LH as the owner asked- we walked. It's not their call. glc -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Williams - FPDC Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 5:38 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Sprinklers in Art Bldg. at the University The problem is what happens if the drawings come back from the A/E approved? I would assume that the insurance engineer would reject them, but can you really count on that? What would be your liability if everyone said go with the LH? The Owner, A/E and Insurance company need to hash this out. If it were me, I'd put a hold on the drawings until I get and answer (and put it in writing, of course). Keep pushing, you're doing the right thing. n the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
