Carrol, Definitely hang your hat on the "New Technology" section in NFPA 13. 1.6 New Technology. 1.6.1 Nothing in this standard shall be intended to restrict new technologies or alternate arrangements, provided the level of safety prescribed by this standard is not lowered. Using a newer standard is a new technology or alternate arrangement and it would be easy to show that newer standards improve the level of safety prescribed by previous editions. As preparation in your discussion, you should know the history of the change that happened from 2002 to 2007. During the Proposal Phase in 2004, a current member of the AFSA Board of Directors and former Fire Marshal in Fairfax, VA submitted a proposal to the NFPA 13 Committee. In ROP 13-726, Jack Medovich, a Professional Engineer, asked that the annex include language pointing directly to the "design area" of the small room rule for residential calc's. He felt that this was always allowed but wanted it to be included as specific guidance in the annex. The NFPA 13 Committee accepted his idea and changed the language of the annex. In 2005, Ken Isman of the NFSA, a Fellow of the Society of Fire Protection Engineers, submitted a Comment that incorporated that change into the body of the standard. In ROC 13-276, his Comment consolidated many of the Chapter 11 changes made during the ROP and he cites each ROP Log within his Comment. One of the things the Committee accepted was moving Jack's change into the body of NFPA 13. In my thinking, this makes the Committee's intent for new technology very clear. I look forward to hearing how this comes out for you. And would someone please help me find that electron? I know it's there but every time I look it's someplace else!
Sincerely, Cecil Bilbo Academy of Fire Sprinkler Technology Champaign, IL www.sprinkleracademy.com [email protected] > Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 08:28:50 -0700 > From: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Residential "Room Design Method"? > To: [email protected] > > Guys, > > So sorry to have left you hanging last night! I got word from my AHJ last > evening, that "he (the department) have adopted 2002 and so to please submit > new > calcs based on 8.4.5.1 and 8.4.5.1 of the 2002 edition." AAAAUGGGGGHHHH!!! > I then proceeded to my favorite watering hole for some "inspiration"of my > own... > > In response to your earlier question, Cecil, you are correct, the "small room > rule" was exactly what I was looking for. I only have a 2002 with me here at > home and I should have checked the 2007, where I would have found the > provision > in 8.6.2.1.2. (ok, maybe I would have found it... : ) > > But now, new question.... It has always been my understanding that you can > cite > from newer editions but never backward. Can I use 1.5 or 1.6 from 2002 to > help > persuade the AHJ to accept 11.3.1.2 from 2007, the newer edition? Any other > ideas on how I convince him? > > ________________________________ > _______________________________________________ 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)
