Realize, also Rahe, that some of us are speaking as the specifying engineers. We're getting our hands slapped during the design for following one UFC document when we should also be referencing a different one (I'm speaking about the 12 psi loss issue through a BFP).
Mark A. Sornsin, PE Fire Protection Engineer Ulteig Engineers, Inc. Fargo, ND Direct: 701. 280.8591 [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 2:25 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Inadequte Water I suggest that if one feels like the requirements are incorrect, inaccurate, overkill, etc. he ought to not bid the project, qualify his bid, or bid the project accordingly meeting all of the requirements. What is at issue here is not the technical merits of sprinkler systems or even hydraulics. It is contractual. If you cannot meet the requirements, then pass on this project and move on to ones that are easier and more profitable. You may as well give up now because you are not going to convince the government agency of any of the technical expediencies discussed on the forum. Their requirements are, in some ways, without merit, but are rigidly enforced from a contractual standpoint. Thank You Rahe Loftin, P.E. Region 7 - GSA Office - 817-978-7299 Fax - 817-978-8644 Cell - 817-371-3102 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
