Todd, and everyone else for that matter. Lets not take a reactive approach here, we hear way too much when statistics are used against prudent fire protection simply because something bad hasnt happened. We need to remain focused and proactive.
The problem isnt with the concept of preventing backflow, its a damn good idea for public safety, the problem is with the technology in accomplishing it. I liken the situation to elevator power shunt trip, now thats a fiasco. John Drucker Fire Protection Subcode Official (AHJ) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Williams - work Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 4:58 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Backflow: Sprinkler System Let me throw one more thing into this. Is there any history of a water supply protected by a DCVA being contaminated by water pumped through an FDC? How about one with an RPZ? At 04:50 PM 7/13/2007, you wrote: >the probability of a pumper or 2nd-due engine >gettin the connections wet is more ProbablY >good odds if there is fire showing. > >foam in the tank is possible, though highly >improbably as it is usually inducted at a >hose outlay rather than >poured into the belly of the engine's tank. > >what we are arguing over (probability of a >engine contaminating a potable water supply) >is best visited by those that do this work: >engineers on fire trucks. They know the >Probability of them contaminating potable >water is very, very low, for most municipal >jurisdictions. > >These musings will continue to be just that, >until the people who are doing what we are >talking about, weigh in. > >What happened to common sense? Out in >Enviro world, I hear of people using Ca(SO4)2 >to precipitate dissolved chlorine from water >flow test discharge. I thought the disassociation >constant for Sulfates were much lower than for >Chlorides, even without speaking to the fact of >mixing times. Are we trying to >solve a problem that may not exist in >epidemiological terms? NIH must have stats on >that. I don´t think pumpers in large cities are >doing much drafting from ponds. > >Leakage creeping around a 15 year old BFP >holding back sprinkler muck-water... that is another >story. > >scot deal >excelsior fire > > > >On 7/13/07, Michael O'Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>How about an end thought as the day winds down. >> >>I spoke with the ICC about the RPBP vs DDC thing out of the IPC >> >>Specifically section 608. The funny part about this section is that it >>speaks to a DDC throughout the section except when you have antifreeze or >>foam in the system. >> >>The unique part is the commentary of the code. The commentary (for you >>sprinkler folks that's like the handbooks in ICC language) speaks very >>specifically that if a non-potable water source is used in a fire truck >>then >>a RPBP is required. That is every single fire truck in the US. If they >>suck out of a pond, use hose to connect to a hydrant, use foam in a tank, >>use any solvent or the like in the tank, etc. . . >> >>What is frustrating to me is that this language is very clear in the >>commentary. If that is what the "intent" truly is, then change the code >>language to reflect the commentary. I work for many municipalities and >>work >>on the AHJ side and this is a tough issues. >> >>What is truly the probability of a Fire truck pumping into a FDC? >>I think we all can agree that the RPBP is a maintenance nightmare. If you >>want I can summarize the commentary language on a future email. >> >> >>Michael O'Brian >>Code Savvy Consultants >>www.codesavvyconsultants.com >>313-618-6401 >>Fax 313-557-0294 >> >>************************************************ >>Take a look at www.inspector911.com the first site dedicated to code >>enforcmenet (inspectors, fire marhsals, building officals, and plan >>reviewers). >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John >>Drucker >>Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 10:11 AM >>To: [email protected] >>Subject: RE: Backflow: Sprinkler System >> >>Roland >> >>Take a look at this; >> >>2006 NSPC 10.5.9 - Exception (3) "Where fire protection include a fire >>department connection, double check valve assemblies shall not be >>permitted." >> >>John >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland >>Huggins >>Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 10:04 AM >>To: [email protected] >>Subject: Re: Backflow: Sprinkler System >> >>One of the aspects that drive an RPZ is when the fire dept draft from >>non-potable sources (anytime). >> >>Roland >>_______________________________________________ >>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) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>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) >> >>_______________________________________________ >>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) >_______________________________________________ >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) Todd G. Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, Connecticut 860-535-2080 www.fpdc.com _______________________________________________ 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) _______________________________________________ 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)
