Now that is a great idea Ron.... I think we have a winner.... Would really give us an out if they didn't take the voluntary alternate and would also likely have them asking all bidding contractors about their scope as you pointed out. thank you Ron!
-----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of rongreenman . Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 12:05 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Preaction Systems Scope You could have a base bid price excluding the electrics, with an "in bold" extra for the inclusion electrics. That might get their attention and still let them compare apples to apples. I know I've done that and that started someone asking questions about just what the other bids included. On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Rod DiBona <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you all for your help. That is what I thought but we were > starting to wonder if we were the only ones that seem to consistently > have this problem. We so clearly, in bold exclude it in detail and > then still end up with a fight at the end because the GC didn't buy it > out. We were considering just including all of it in all of our > preaction bids so they get a complete system and eliminate the hassle > but felt that this would make us less competitive if others weren't > doing the same. We will continue to exclude and see if we can't find a > better way to communicate that this is a likely scope gap unless it is > addressed at bid time. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of rongreenman . > Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 11:03 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Preaction Systems Scope > > Here it is typically handled like Mike describes too. Everyone pretty > much knows the general's contracts guy will miss all the exclusion > clauses unless he's been bitten before. The object is to get the > building built with all systems working. > > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Morey, Mike <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Typically we tried to let the project team work it out, but if they > > didn't or there wasn't a well defined project team to resolve these > > issues we'd typically take it out for numbers. Usually we try and > > get the electrical/alarm bidders for the project to put a number on it. > > > > Mike Morey, CFPS, SET > > Planner Scheduler/Designer > > BMWC Constructors, Inc. > > 1740 W. Michigan St, Indianapolis, IN 46222 > > O: 317.651.0596 | C: 317.586.8111 > > [email protected] | www.bmwc.com > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: Sprinklerforum > > <[email protected]> > > on behalf of Rod DiBona <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 12:25 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Preaction Systems Scope > > > > I am wondering how most of you handle the detection and releasing > > systems for your preaction systems. We traditionally have excluded > > all electrical and alarm but find it very common that the fire alarm > > contractor was just smarts and parts and the electrician doesn't > > have it in his scope. Not very often have the ME and EE coordinated > > so that > it is spelled out correctly. > > So my question is do most of you include this scope and have an > > electrical subcontractor that runs the conduit, provides and > > installs the heats or detectors and programs the releasing panel or > > do you exclude? Thanks > > > > > > Rod at Rapid Fire > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > kl er.org _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > 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) > > A problem well stated is a problem half solved. -Charles F. Kettering, > inventor and engineer (1876-1958) > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.org > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > 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) A problem well stated is a problem half solved. -Charles F. Kettering, inventor and engineer (1876-1958) _______________________________________________ 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
