Phill is on the committee (also past chair) and the bad news is that
the AWWA does things (like adding sodium silicate to their
distribution systems) without seeking input form their own
resources. Frustrating to say the least.
Roland
On Oct 9, 2007, at 2:30 PM, George Church wrote:
I believe Roland is on the AWWA committee to try to head off the
backflow
Nazis at the root. Imagine when he gets done what he's doing and
reads this,
he'll chime in with a better statement than "Just tell the water
purveyor
NO!".
glc
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron
Greenman
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 5:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Double-check vs RPs
One of those little extras we do without much fanfare. When Washington
first implemented backflow regulation through the Dept. of Health the
backflow folks started going crazy on retrofits wherever possible. The
hydraulic implications concerned me so I got involved and eventually
got a line into the administrative code to the effect that whenever a
retrofit was required to a sprinkler system consideration would be
given to the hydraulics. Although pretty weak it did open the eyes of
the water folks to the fact that their decision had life safety
implications beyond their own concerns. This started a dialogue and to
my knowledge these retrofits are usually negotiated when an issue
arises.
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:Sprinklerforum-
[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)
