Allow me to address just the issue of the inspector failing to require it. As contractors, that's how we desperately want to perceive it. The truth is that the contractor (whether it was the fire alarm or the sprinkler guy) failed to install them IF required by code. The inspector failed to catch their mistake but that does not make the inspector own it. As already mentioned, only an approved variance letter shifts the ownership to the AHJ.
They are the safety net and in some places it has a tight weave and others it wouldn’t catch a Mac truck. We’ll ignore the age old conflict with those that us a sledge hammer but have no knowledge. We want well trained inspectors so there is a better chance of catching the inevitable mistake. It’s also nice when we are all dancing on a level playing field since it is hard to compete against an under-designed system. Roland Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives Dallas, TX http://www.firesprinkler.org <http://www.firesprinkler.org/> > On Aug 31, 2015, at 5:49 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > What say you? > An inspector failed to require tamper switches on control valves. The job is > complete and there are thousands of pounds of concrete between the control > valves and the electrical panel. They placed a chain and lock and the chief > declared the chain and lock meet intent...final approved. What say you? _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
