George, I don't like being above the second floor because I don't trust the sprinkler guys. I'm likely to become a ground floor guy only. I had to jump off my garage roof this past summer (ladder mishap) and the impact at 62 is far more severe than I remember at 32. Thank god the army taught me how to fall out of an airplane.
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 11:22 AM, George Church <[email protected]>wrote: > I know we don't have time to bid it once, but doing a base bid for what's > shown, and an ADDER for the CC2's with a description like "required to meet > code" and if they accept it, you and they are covered. > If they don't, then at least you have the leg to stand on that you educated > them on what was needed, they declined to pay for it, and thereby > (financially) directed you to proceed with the installation according to > (defective) plans and specs. > > Another way is to call the AHJ as you submit and inform him that your > submittal doesn't meet code. When the dwgs are bounced, send a COR for the > redesign time, schedule impact, and the original ADDER from your bid and ask > for the extra again. > This puts them in the position of delaying the project, knowing they can't > get a CO without sprinkler, and that your schedule impact will grow larger > by the day. > > It might also be worth pointing out to the GC or Owner you're working for > that the PE that incorrectly designed it without the CC2s has liability > insurance to cover the cost of fixing his mistakes- and this would be one of > them. > > If we as an industry held their feet to the fire, we'd have less plumbing > designers burping out faulty designs. If they didn't shape up, Victor O > would, in rate premiums or withholding coverage, enforce compliance with > practicing within their area of competence. > > > Boy, I sure hope bridge and tunnel construction doesn't have this same > thing happening behind the scenes. I've stopped feeling comfortable being > above the 4th floor years ago, knowing elevator inspectors are likely just > as sharp as DOH and our local inspectors. > > > George L. Church, Jr., CET > Rowe Sprinkler Systems, Inc. > PO Box 407, Middleburg, PA 17842 > 877-324-ROWE 570-837-6335 fax > [email protected] > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Travis Mack, SET > Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 1:45 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Combustible Concealed Spaces > > I know this has been brought up before, but how are you handling > pre-engineered projects where they are not showing these specially listed > heads (Tyco CC1/CC2 or Viking COIN) as req'd per NFPA 13? We are seeing > several of these again where there is a flat roof, less than 36" > of clearance between roof and ceiling and the PE is showing SSU sprinklers > in the space. These are projects that have been reviewed by the local AHJ > and approved. Do you just install per the plan and say the responsibility > is to some one else? In this particular jurisdiction, even if the piping is > installed per the approved plans, the inspectors can and have required > changes to the system to correct plan review errors. What if the project > gets installed / inspected per plan and there is a fire later on where the > sprinkler system is not able to contain the fire in the concealed space > because of incorrect heads? > Where does the liability go? One project in particular has the typical PE > comment: The installing contractor is to take full responsibility for > installing a system per NFPA 13 and shall add heads as needed at no > additional costs after bid. Is this able to transfer liability to the > contractor? > > One of my customers does a lot of multi-family type projects and we are > seeing this over and over. I have been working with him to educate his GC's > and the architects / engineers on this issue, but there are still many > projects that come across his desk for bid like this. Does anyone have a > practical solution? We are trying to RFI these projects, but many times the > PE will not respond to the questions prior to the bid date. > > Sorry for the long run on questions. Thanks in advance for your > assistance. > > -- > Please feel free to call if you have any questions or comments. > > Sincerely, > > Travis Mack, SET > MFP Design, LLC > 2508 E Lodgepole Drive > Gilbert, AZ 85298 > Office (480) 505-9271 > Fax (866) 430-6107 > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 [email protected] http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ 253.680.7346 253.576.9700 (cell) Member: ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachments/20111005/0f7941c4/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
