We've had a project or three where we had to wrestle a certificate out of the owner because the AHJs (Cobb and Gwinnett County, metro Atlanta) require it be submitted with the sprinkler drawings. This was after the bid.
Bobby McCullough Atlanta Sprinkler Inspection [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thom McMahon Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 10:52 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: MIC test Great question G. How many of you ever see an Owners cert.? and of those that do how many are after you've bid, and are trying to justify your bid vs. the storage or occupancy you see on the job? Has anyone seen or been required to provide the owners cert. to get a permit? Thom McMahon Firetech, Inc. 2560 Copper Ridge Dr Steamboat Springs, CO 80488-2136 Tel: 970-879-7952 Fax: 970-879-7926 ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Church" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 7:15 AM Subject: RE: MIC test > You raise a great point, Terry- > I have yet to ever see an Owner's Certificate in a bid package. > > Is this something that others are seeing in more progressive (compliant?) > areas? > > glc > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Victor, > Terry > Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 8:40 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: MIC test > > George, > > We deliberately changed 13 to put the responsibility on the owner for > conditions in the water supply that we as contractors may have to > address. In the 1999 version of 13, if we as contractors had 'knowledge' > that MIC was a problem in a given water supply, we were responsible for > testing and possibly treating that water supply when installing systems > connected to it. So if one contractor knew of a MIC problem, and another > one didn't, the bids would be apples and oranges. The 13 technical > committee determined that any information regarding the need for > treating or otherwise addressing MIC or corrosion issues in the water > supply shall be provided in the owner's certificate, starting in the > 2002 edition, section 4.3. All contractors would then be bidding with > the same information. > > We do have a responsibility to test for MIC in the latest editions of 25 > (since 2002) if evidence of slime or tubercules is found during the 5 > year obstruction inspection. > > Terry Victor > National Manager of Sprinkler Systems > SimplexGrinnell > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George > Church > Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 8:15 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: MIC test > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George > Church > Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 4:09 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: MIC test > > how are y'all covering the MIC testing in the new #13? > Dump it on the Owner? > Are water companies including MIC test in their QC monitoring analysis? > Are AHjs allowing the relaxation of the Addenda? > > George Church > Rowe Sprinkler > _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
