AHJ and whim has a familiar ring to it. Ron F
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dwight Havens Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 6:58 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test - MELTDOWN ALERT Let's go back to the beginning of this thread, was it the AHJ or the owner's representative who was requiring the sign, and was it in the job specification, or required on a whim? Dwught ________________________________ From: Greg McGahan <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 6:19 PM Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test - MELTDOWN ALERT LOL well, Booby started the thread becasue we couldn't find a sign....we made one - done - close it up and go home. On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Steve Leyton <[email protected]>wrote: > I think this is different from the flushing thread, but my energy is > focused at this moment on the fact that emails bearing the subject, " > SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test" have been > coming into my mailbox for what now, 10 days? The standard says what > it says. My entrepreneurial self sees a business opportunity, as the > standard now requires that we sell an additional hour-and-a-half or two > of service. The problem, as always, is that if you raise your proposal > by $175 or whatever it costs, the idiot competitor who gets the work > will not have included that. So ... go to the level of enforcement. > Cold call the fire official and say, "Hey! The standard requires this, > you (or the state) have adopted this standard, I'm trying to undertake > the prescriptive requirements that you are telling me to and I'm getting > killed out here." Do what you can to get the enforcers to enforce, > tool up and then explain to your clients that the first pass at this > flow test may require a one-time modification of the system to create > the requisite connection. And then SELL, SELL, SELL. > > But let's at least change the name of the thread to something more > honest like, "Change makes us uncomfortable." > > SML > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron > Greenman > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 3:02 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test > > Yeah Steve, like dribbling despite high or low residual pressure, or > good flow but big residual drop, or...but wait, those are reasons to > suspect impairment during the main drain test. I also notice in 25/11 > you don't need to measure if the backflow is before a fire pump that's > has annual flows through a test header or test loop, nor do you have to > measure riser 2" or less if the backflow is at least that size. This is > sounding like another thread from today where an AHJ wants all the brand > new heads removed and inspected for damage because something might have > damaged them because pipe didn't have the outlets sealed before the > heads were attached. > So essentially this AHJ wants new heads replaced with new heads since > the book says toss 'em if you remove 'em. I had an AHJ want all single > shot heat detectors in a system heat tested, not because shorting the > contacts didn't prove the system, but because he wanted to make sure the > heat detectors worked. I'm off on a tangent but to come back I'm again > failing to see much utility in these details. If a main drain test is > good enough to prove that an alarm check or a single detector check out > at the street is working, why does it take some convoluted set of rules > full of exemptions to do the same thing for a backflow? > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Ron Greenman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Since my friction loss table has a multiplier for demands up to 335 > > gpm I'm guessing that my 2" main drain can flow that much, and since > > it probably won't have too much loss from the main I'm good to 0.2 > > over 1500 sqft or ordinary 2. > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Greg McGahan > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > >> Steve, > >> > >> The probelm is how vague it is - some AHJs want flow Pitot'd, Some > >> say a 2" > >> main drain is fine for everything, some say prove the size before you > > >> pull a permit.... > >> > >> I simple chart would be awesome - IN THE BOOK - so we have something > >> to point to. > >> > >> Greg > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Steve Leyton > >> <[email protected] > >> >wrote: > >> > >> > The required flow is the highest system demand. This has been in > 25 for > >> > (somebody help me out here) at least two cycles, I believe? You > can > >> > use the main drain if you can develop enough flow, you can modify > >> > the main drain connection possibly to create multiple connections, > >> > you can modify and existing riser, put a permanent or temporary > >> > valved connection on the downstream side of the backflow (interior > >> > or exterior) ... This AIN'T rocket science, y'all. > >> > > >> > Steve L. > >> > Trippin' on da backflows > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: [email protected] > >> > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > >> > Of [email protected] > >> > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 2:23 PM > >> > To: [email protected] > >> > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow > >> > Test > >> > > >> > So basically, nobody has a clue what is really required or how to > >> > accurately measure how to properly "exercise" the backflow. Looks > >> > like 2" main d rain test works for me until I'm told otherwise. > >> > I'll just keep the hose monster in the back of the truck just in > case. > >> > > >> > > >> > In a message dated 7/29/2013 5:18:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > >> > [email protected] writes: > >> > > >> > This is kind of like the story where a guy in a bar asks the > >> > shapely young thing on the next barstool if she'd sleep with him > >> > for $100,000.00. She answers with an enthusiastic yes. He then > >> > asks if she'd sleep with him for $10.00. Her response is an > >> > indignant, "what do you take me for, a whore?" > >> > His reply is, "we've already established that. Now we're just > >> > negotiating price." > >> > > >> > This was an illustrative metaphor Steve, not a dirty joke. > >> > > >> > We've established that a forward flow is required. And > >> > surprisingly we've actually got a fairly definitive description of > >> > what we're testing for by the committee in the next edition. To me > > >> > it's in two parts though. First we're not testing so much as > >> > "exercising" a component, which to me is a maintenance issue. In > >> > the process though we're also testing as we're determining if said > component is working. > >> > But when you do a "test" you need a standard of performance. That > >> > brings us to part 2 and that standard appears to be "at system > demand." > >> > That requires a measurement for verification and the comparative > >> > baseline standard. So, and to me only, this new language is as > >> > convoluted as the old and doesn't give me a clear directive. Am I > >> > exercising or comparing results, or both? Can I say that a > >> > 15 head design, using nominal 1/2 inch orifices has a total surface > > >> > area of > >> > 2.94 square inches and a nominal 2 inch main drain has a surface > >> > area of > >> > 3.14 square inches so I'll easily flow as much through my 2 inch > >> > main drain as system demand? Or do I have to calculate BOR flow > >> > demand, test and measure (pitot or buckey) for flow there at > >> > acceptance for verification, and then do that same procedure each > >> > year for confirmation? Or can I just see a good stream from the > >> > main drain, note the pressure are consistent with the acceptance > >> > test and say,"That there no backlow thingie is workin' > >> > just fine."? > >> > > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. < > >> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Depends on the edition of the standard a local jurisdiction has > >> > > adopted, as well as any local amendments - but yes, forward flow > > >> > > tests of the backflow assembly are required by NFPA 13 and 25. > >> > > > >> > > Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. | Karges-Faulconbridge, Inc. | Fire > >> > > Protection Engineer | Fargo, ND | direct: 701.552.9905 | mobile: > > >> > > 701.371.5759 | > >> > > >> > > http://www.kfiengineers.com > >> > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > From: [email protected] [mailto: > >> > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of > >> > > [email protected] > >> > > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 3:49 PM > >> > > To: [email protected] > >> > > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow > >> > > Test > >> > > > >> > > Is this "forward flow test" now part of the required code? I was > > >> > > just > >> > > >> > > on > >> > a > >> > > job the other day. New Construction. I noticed that all the > >> > > systems had a setup with (2) 2 1/2" hose valves after the > >> > > backflow and alarm > >> > > >> > > valve, > >> > in > >> > > addition to the 2" main drain. I take it that these 2 1/2's are > > >> > > for this test? > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > In a message dated 7/29/2013 3:57:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > > >> > > [email protected] writes: > >> > > > >> > > That isn't what the intent of the code is as stated.....just > >> > > flow at > >> > > >> > > system demand. I can only speak for us, but we do a LOT of > >> > > risers with > >> > only > >> > > a 250 gpm or so demand...sometimes even less. > >> > > > >> > > A 4" drain is well over what we need to open it up enough for > >> > > system > >> > > >> > > demand. I would bet a 2" drain gets really close. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:52 PM, David Autry > >> > > <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Wouldn't it be easier, if you have a 4" backflow preventer > >> > > > you run > >> > 4" > >> > > > out the wall, 3" BFP, 3" out the wall, etc... > >> > > > That should open her up all the way. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > David Autry > >> > > > > >> > > > Meininger Fire Protection Inc. > >> > > > 2521 W L St. Suite No.4 > >> > > > Lincoln, Ne 68522 > >> > > > Voice (402) 466-2616 > >> > > > Fax (402) 466-2617 > >> > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > From: [email protected] > >> > > > [mailto:[email protected]] On > >> > > > Behalf Of > >> > > Greg > >> > > > McGahan > >> > > > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 2:35 PM > >> > > > To: [email protected] > >> > > > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward > >> > > > Flow Test > >> > > > > >> > > > What would be simple and helpful would be a table similar to > >> > > > the > >> > one > >> > > > used for sizing fire pump Suction/Discharge/Relief Valve > Piping > >> > etc. > >> > > > > >> > > > Since you are not measuring pressure, you could say 2" up to > >> > > > X gallons, 2.5" for Y etc.... > >> > > > > >> > > > A 2-1/2" Main drain is much easier and cheaper than some of > >> > > > the arrangments left / required on backflow preventers. > >> > > > > >> > > > Greg > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Ron Greenman > >> > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Better but it is still interpretable as requiring a > >> > > > > measured flow be established (if using the main drain > >> > > > > location then the BOR > >> > > > > design > >> > > data). > >> > > > > Then you'd need a port that flowed that much, main drain or > > >> > > > > otherwise, and then measure your annual test against > >> > > > > anticipated > >> > > >> > > > > flow to make > >> > > > > sure you are meeting or exceeding the required flow. Or am > >> > > > I missing > >> > > > > something? I'm pretty certain that newer fire service rated > > >> > > > > backflows don't fail any more often than normal FS checks, > >> > > > > and that that type of failure is either catastrophic > >> > > > > (doesn't open > >> > or barely > >> > > > > opens) wouldn't a simple main drain test with decent flow > >> > > > > demonstrate that the valve is working? just a Forum > >> > > > > question as this is a done deal and I wasn't invited to join > > >> > > > > the exclusive > >> > > > > 25 club. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Roland Huggins > >> > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > the next edition has been cleaned-up on this issue. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > _____________________________________________________________ > >> > > > > __ > >> > > > > > 25-271 > >> > > > > Log > >> > > > > > #CP15 Final Action: Accept (13.6.2.1, 13.6.2.2 (New)) > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > >> > > > > > ____ > >> > > > > Submitter: > >> > > > > > Technical Committee on Inspection, Testing, and > >> > > > > > Maintenance of > >> > > > > Water-Based > >> > > > > > Systems, > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Recommendation: Revise 13.6.2.1 to read as follows: > >> > > > > > 13.6.2.1 All backflow preventers installed in fire > >> > > > > > protection system piping shall be exercised annually by > >> > > > > > conducting a forward flow test at a minimum flow rate of > the system design. > >> > > > > > Add new 13.6.2.2 and renumber subsequent sections > accordingly: > >> > > > > > 13.6.2.2 Where hydrants or inside hose stations are > >> > > > > located > >> > > > > > downstream of the backflow preventer, the forward flow > >> > > test shall > >> > > > > > include hose stream demand. Substantiation: This change > was > >> > > > > > needed to better reflect that the backflow preventer is > >> > > > > > not a > >> > > >> > > > > > precise test whereby the flow through it must be measured > >> > > > > > but > >> > > > > > effort to exercise the device at flows as near as > > > >> > > possible > >> > > > > > to the system demand. > >> > > > > > Committee Meeting Action: Accept > >> > > > > > Number Eligible to Vote: 33 > >> > > > > > Ballot Results: Affirmative: 32 Negative: 1 Explanation > of > >> > Negative: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > RAY, R.: This proposal should have been accepted in > principle: > >> > > > the > >> > > > > wording > >> > > > > > "at a minimum flow rate" is confusing and should be > reworded. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > >> > > > > > ____ > >> > > > > > 25-272 > >> > > > > Log > >> > > > > > #121 Final Action: Accept > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > (13.6.2.1.1) > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > >> > > > > > ____ > >> > > > > Submitter: > >> > > > > > Roland J. Huggins, American Fire Sprinkler Association, > Inc. > >> > > > > > Recommendation: Delete the following text: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > 13.6.2.1.1 For backflow preventers sized 2 in. (50 mm) > >> > > > > > and under, the forward flow test shall be acceptable to > >> > > > > > conduct without measuring flow, where the test outlet is > >> > > > > > of a size to flow the system > >> > > > demand. > >> > > > > > Substantiation: This section implies that a measured flow > > >> > > > > > is required for Backflow preventers (BFP) larger than 2 in > > >> > > > > > when nothing > >> > > > > > in 13.6.2.1 > >> > > > > states > >> > > > > > such a requirement. There are other means to identify > >> > > > > > that the > >> > > > > > system demand is flowing through the BFP as discussed in > >> > > > > > A.13.6.2.1 > >> > > > > > It also > >> > > > > needs > >> > > > > > to be kept in mind that we are simply exercising the BFP > >> > > > > > to ensure it > >> > > > > will > >> > > > > > fully open at approximately the system demand. A high > >> > > > > > degree of accuracy regarding the volume of water is not > warranted. > >> > > > > > Additionally, BFP's are subjected to an annual internal > >> > > > > > inspection as part of the cross > >> > > > > connection > >> > > > > > protection program. Committee Meeting Action: Accept > >> > > > > > Number > >> > > > > > Eligible to Vote: 33 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 33 > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers > Saves > >> > > > Lives > >> > > > > > Dallas, TX > >> > > > > > http://www.firesprinkler.org > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Jul 26, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Dwight Havens > >> > > > > <[email protected]> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Then they ought to say that in the code language. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dwight > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > ________________________________ > >> > > > > > > From: John Denhardt <[email protected]> > >> > > > > > > To: "[email protected]" < > >> > > > > > [email protected]> > >> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 3:07 PM > >> > > > > > > Subject: RE: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly > >> > > > > > > Forward Flow > >> > > > > > > Test > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > While I do disagree to some extent of what the NFPA 25 > >> > > > > > > committee has > >> > > > > > done, Roland statement is correct. I have had numerous > >> > > > > > discussions with NFPA 25 committee members where they > >> > > > > > have stated the intent was to > >> > > > > exercise > >> > > > > > the device at near system demand. The key word to me was > >> > > "Exercise". > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > John > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > John August Denhardt, P.E., FSFPE Strickland Fire > >> > > > > > > Protection > >> > > >> > > > > > > Incorporated > >> > > > > > > 5113 Berwyn Road > >> > > > > > > College Park, Maryland 20740 Office Telephone Number: > >> > > > > > > 301-474-1136 Mobile Telephone Number: > >> > > > > > > 301-343-1457 FIRE SPRINKLERS SAVE LIVES - Can you live > >> > > > > without > >> > > > > > > them? > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > >> > > > > > > From: [email protected] > >> > [mailto: > >> > > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf > > >> > > > Of Forest > >> > > > > Wilson > >> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 2:42 PM > >> > > > > > > To: [email protected] > >> > > > > > > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly > >> > > > > > > Forward Flow > >> > > > > > > Test > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Here is an email on this topic that Roland addressed in > > >> > > > > > > the > >> > past: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Im not going to say it was one of those casual > >> > > > > assumptions that > >> > > > > > > all systems are calculated nor that all risers have > >> > placards. > >> > > > > > > The main thing to keep in mind that the intent is > simply to > >> > > > > > > fully EXERCISE the BFP at what os expected to be the > >> > > > > > > system > >> > > >> > > > > > > demand. If no data available, a discussion with the AHJ > > >> > > > > > > is > >> > > > > > > warranted. As for > >> > > > > > > benchmarks, only the flow is pertinent and pressure is > >> > > irrelevant. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Roland > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:44 PM, Matthew J. Willis wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > >>> On a more important matter: If a system was > >> > > > retrofitted > >> > with > >> > > > a > >> > > > > > >>> backflow, > >> > > > > > >> and > >> > > > > > >>> there is no hydraulic calc plaque attached to the > >> > > > > > >>> riser, and > >> > > > > > >>> NFPA requires forward flow testing of backflows, how > >> > > > > > can you > >> > > > > > >>> conduct the test without a benchmark to test against? > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > >>> What is the recommended practice in this scenario? > >> > > > > > >>> Forest Wilson > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Jul 25, 2013, at 12:16 PM, Ron Greenman > >> > > > > > > <[email protected]> > >> > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Then subjective good flow demonstrates a working > >> > > > > > >> valve? If so all the numbers bantered around are > pretty meaningless. > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Forest Wilson > >> > > > > > >> <[email protected] > >> > > > > > >wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >>> No. > >> > > > > > >>> The intent is not to pitot the output but to exercise > > >> > > > > the > >> > valve. > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > >>> Sent from my iPhone > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > >>> On Jul 25, 2013, at 10:56 AM, Ron Greenman >>> > >> > > > > > <[email protected]> > >> > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > >>>> Forest. What were you flowing to discover these > >> > failures? > >> > > > > > >>>> Main > >> > > > > > >>>> drain > >> > > > > > or > >> > > > > > >>>> some special test header? Would a sign with the > >> > > > > data > >> > > > > > >>>> requested > >> > > > > > >>>> by > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > > >>>> customer that started this thread have had any > >> > > > > > utility in >>>> helping > >> > > > > you > >> > > > > > >>>> discover the problem? > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> Then back to that perennial question of what's a > >> > > > > > "full flow > >> > " > >> > > > > > >>>> test > >> > > > > and > >> > > > > > >>> how > >> > > > > > >>>> do you do one? I think Roland said the intent was to > > >> > > > > > flow an equivalent > >> > > > > > >>> to > >> > > > > > >>>> the design discharge criteria. How do you do this? > Do we > >> > run > >> > > > > > >>>> a > >> > > > > > >>>> pitot somewhere on the system? Do we catch and > >> > > > > > measure > >> > > > > > >>>> discharge? If so, from > >> > > > > > >>>> where? How do we arrange the test port(s)? Do we > flow > >> > the > >> > > > > > >>>> design > >> > > > > area > >> > > > > > or > >> > > > > > >>>> simulate it elsewhere? Do we need results of at > >> > > > > > least or > >> > > > > > >>>> better > >> > > > > > >>>> flow > >> > > > > > or > >> > > > > > >>>> right on the money flow? If not either of those how > >> > > > > > do we > >> > > judge? > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> Doesn't the hydraulic data plate note the required > >> > > > psi per > >> > > > > > >>>> the calcs > >> > > > > > at > >> > > > > > >>> the > >> > > > > > >>>> BOR and the static? Isn't the difference the > >> > > > > residual drop at > >>>> that > >> > > > > > point > >> > > > > > >>>> relative to the design area? Wouldn't a main drain > >> > > > with good > >> > > > > > >>>> flow > >> > > > > at a > >> > > > > > >>> psi > >> > > > > > >>>> around the BOR rating, and returning to close to the > > >> > > > > > noted >>>> static > >> > > > > when > >> > > > > > >>>> terminated suggest a fully open valve, or an > >> > > > > > >>>> adequately open > >> > > > > > >>>> valve > >> > > > > if > >> > > > > > the > >> > > > > > >>>> UG is oversized? In the latter case the partially > >> > > open valve > >> > > > > > is > >> > > > > > >>> equivalent > >> > > > > > >>>> to fully open for the system I just described. Am I > >> > > > > > missing > >> > > > > something > >> > > > > > >>> here? > >> > > > > > >>>> An erroneous a priori? My understanding of > hydraulics > >> > wrong? > >> > > > > > >>>> Main > >> > > > > > drains > >> > > > > > >>>> are too small to simulate the result of all design > >> > > > > > >>>> area > >> > > > > > >>>> heads > >> > > > > flowing > >> > > > > > as > >> > > > > > >>>> the water passes through the BOR? > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:34 AM, Forest Wilson < > >> > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>> wrote: > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> I still have the check valve from a Ames that > >> > > > > > failed to > >> > open. > >> > > > > > >>>>> It was jammed shut, discovered when I was called > >> > > > > > out because > >> > > > > > >>>>> they > >> > > > > > >>> couldn't > >> > > > > > >>>>> do the fire pump test. > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> In another case, I tested a backflow and it failed > >> > > > > > (on a > >> > > >> > > > > > Best > >> > > > > > >>>>> Buy > >> > > > > > >>> store). > >> > > > > > >>>>> I opened the valve up and the check was damaged, > >> > > > > > >>>>> would only > >> > > > > > >>>>> open a > >> > > > > > >>> third. > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> Sent from my iPhone > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> On Jul 24, 2013, at 8:53 PM, Ron Greenman > >>>>> > > >> > > > > <[email protected]> > >> > > > > > >>> wrote: > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>> Worked well for plumbing and process piping > >> > > > > applications > >> > > > > > as > >> > > > > > >>>>>> they > >> > > > > are > >> > > > > > >>>>>> constantly being exercised. > >> > > > > > >>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Dwight Havens < > >> > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>> wrote: > >> > > > > > >>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> I do remember the ones with the rods in the > center > >> > of > >> > > > > > the > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> valve > >> > > > > > being > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> particularly poor. > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Dwight > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> ________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> From: Ron Greenman <[email protected]> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> To: [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 11:25 PM > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention > >> > > Assembly > >> > > > Forward > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Flow > >> > > > > > Test > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> By the mid-nineties you have the early Ames > >> > > > > > models > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> purpose > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> built > >> > > > > > for > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> sprinklers readily available, but many units > >> > > > > > being installed > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> are > >> > > > > > still > >> > > > > > >>>>> not > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> listed for fire service as many jurisdictions > >> > > > > > don't consider > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> the > >> > > > > > fire > >> > > > > > >>>>> line > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> a fire line until after the backflow, and a n > >> > > on-listed > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> device is > >> > > > > > >>>>> cheaper > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> than a listed one. Plus many go back to the > >> > seventies > >> > > > > > and > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> many > >> > > > > used > >> > > > > > >>>>> weights > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> instead of springs and complicated lever systems > > >> > > > > > for > >> > > >> > > > > > joining >>>>>>> the > >> > > > > > >>>>> clappers > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> and weights. Wish I could post a picture. > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Dwight Havens < > > >> > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Give me a time frame. My best recollection is > >> > > > > > the mid > >> > > '90's. > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Dwight > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> ________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> From: Ron Greenman <[email protected]> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> To: [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 9:12 PM > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention > >> > > Assembly > >> > > > Forward > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Flow > >> > > > > > Test > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Were these the plumbing type before fire > >> > > > > service listed > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> devices > >> > > > > > >>>>> existed. > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Dwight Havens > < > >> > > > > > >>> [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Yes, yes, and yes. The original proposal was > > >> > > > > > based on >>>>>>>>> observed >>>>>>> failures > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> of BFPAs to operate properly during main > drain > >> > testing. > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Glendale, AZ public library specifically > >> > > > > > comes to > >> > mind. > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Dwight > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> ________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> From: Todd Williams <[email protected]> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> To: "[email protected]" < > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 9:32 PM > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Assembly > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Forward > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Flow > >> > > > > > Test > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Has there ever been an instance of system > >> > > > > > failure due to >>>>>>>>> the >>> backflow > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> not > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> properly opening? How about detection of a > >> > > > > > BFP problem >>>>>>>>> during a full > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> flow > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> test. How about something subsequent to the > initial > >> > > > acceptance? > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Todd G Williams, PE > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, > > >> > > > > CT > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> 860-535-2080 > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> www.fpdc.com > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> -- > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> 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, > >> > > > > WFSC > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> They are happy men whose natures sort with > >> > > > > > their > >> > > vocations. > >> > > > > > -Francis > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Bacon, > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> essayist, philosopher, and statesman > >> > > > > (1561-1626) > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> 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, >>>>>>> WFSC > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> They are happy men whose natures sort with their > >> > vocations. > >> > > > > > -Francis > >> > > > > > >>>>> Bacon, > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>> -- > >> > > > > > >>>>>> 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, > >> > > > > > >>>>>> WFSC > >> > > > > > >>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>>> They are happy men whose natures sort with their > >> > vocations. > >> > > > > -Francis > >> > > > > > >>>>> Bacon, > >> > > > > > >>>>>> essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > >> > > > > > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>> > >> > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>> > >> > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesp > >> > > rin > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > >>>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> -- > >> > > > > > >>>> 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, > >> > > > > > >>>> WFSC > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >>>> They are happy men whose natures sort with their > >> > vocations. > >> > > > > > >>>> -Francis > >> > > > > > >>> Bacon, > >> > > > > > >>>> essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > >> > > > > > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > > > > >>>> [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > >>> _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > > > > >>> [email protected] > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> -- > >> > > > > > >> 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, > >> > > > WFSC > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> They are happy men whose natures sort with their > >> > vocations. > >> > > > > > >> -Francis > >> > > > > > Bacon, > >> > > > > > >> essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > >> > > > > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> > >> > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > 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, WFSC > >> > > > > > >> > > > > They are happy men whose natures sort with their > vocations. > >> > > > > -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman > (1561-1626) > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > kl > >> > > > > er.org > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Greg McGahan > >> > > > Living Water Fire Protection, LLC > <http://www.livingwaterfp.com> > >> > > > 1160 McKenzie Road > >> > > > Cantonment, FL 32533 > >> > > > 850-937-1850 > >> > > > fax 850-937-1852 > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink > >> ler > >> > .o > >> > > > rg > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink > >> ler > >> > .org > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -- > >> > > Greg McGahan > >> > > Living Water Fire Protection, LLC > >> > > <http://www.livingwaterfp.com> > >> > > 1160 McKenzie Road > >> > > Cantonment, FL 32533 > >> > > 850-937-1850 > >> > > fax 850-937-1852 > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > [email protected] > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink > >> ler > >> > .org > >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > [email protected] > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink > >> ler > >> > .org > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > _________________________________________________________________ > >> > > _____ This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email > >> > > Security.cloud > >> > service. > >> > > For more information please visit > >> > > >> http://www.symanteccloud.com_________________________________________ > >> ___ > >> > __________________________ > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > > [email protected] > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink > >> ler > >> > .org > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > 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, WFSC > >> > > >> > They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. > >> > -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > [email protected] > >> > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink > >> ler > >> > .org > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > [email protected] > >> > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink > >> ler > >> > .org > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> > [email protected] > >> > > >> > > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink > >> ler.org > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Greg McGahan > >> Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com> > >> 1160 McKenzie Road > >> Cantonment, FL 32533 > >> 850-937-1850 > >> fax 850-937-1852 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> > >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink > >> ler.org > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > 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, WFSC > > > > They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis > > Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > > > > > > -- > 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, WFSC > > They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis > Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler > .org > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > -- Greg McGahan Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com> 1160 McKenzie Road Cantonment, FL 32533 850-937-1850 fax 850-937-1852 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
