It's worse than that in CA - the local fire departments don't even have
jurisdiction over public schools.  There's a state agency for that, and
they are REALLY good at their jobs, as you might expect.
Har-dee-har-har-bleeping-har.   If this nincompoop is really that bent,
it may not make any difference but you've got nothing to lose in defense
of your reputation and intentions so you might consider a VERY gently
worded letter along the lines of what Rod wrote.  "Dearest Water-Brain,
I regret that our inspection work didn't meet your expectations, but we
are bound by state and local codes and regulations to discharge our work
diligently and in consideration of the life-safety implications of
system deficiencies and service faults as they may be encountered.   I
am hopeful that you will come to appreciate that it is not in my or YOUR
interest to overlook conditions that threaten the lives of your
districts student's and employees, as well as the assets these systems
are intended to protect.  The costs of interruption alone might be
greater than the reconstruction costs in case of a fire.  You should
also know that it is reasonable and appropriate to inform the serving
fire department because they should know whether they're sending our
brave brothers and sisters into a building with a working fire
suppression system or not.  Of course, if you insist on smearing our
company's name and reputation I'll be forced to go to the school board
with my lawyer and call you out in a public venue, where the district's
superintendant and counsel will have a chance to hear what a myopic
moron you really are."

Sign it, "Your pal, Forest"

Steve Leyton
Protection Design & Consulting
San Diego, CA


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rod
DiBona
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 8:20 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: inspection reports and copying fire marshals

Yeah I can see the headline now "School district sues fire protection
firm for disclosing life threatening conditions at our school to the
fire marshal..."  Ummmm  good luck with that. I don't think you have
anything to worry about. I would be curious to see who was doing the
annual inspection of the system. Were there any main drain tags showing
the drop and rise back in pressure? We are REQUIRED to provide a
duplicate copy of our inspections to the fire marshal. This is a good
think because then we aren't the bad guy, just the messenger doing what
we have to. My guess is that your competitor will be doing the repairs.

Rod DiBona
Rapid Fire

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 8:50 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: inspection reports and copying fire marshals

I just had a school district call me and yell at me for a report I did.
I conducted a water flow test 2 months ago at this school. The water
department and I observed that the PIV was shut. It had been shut for
the past 6 years. 
Long story short the school asked me to open the valve and inspect for
other problems. I spent an entire day surveying the school and wrote a
13 page report with pictures. Serious issues like rooms missing
sprinklers. Ceiling clouds missing sprinklers etc. No drains or
inspectors tests etc. 
I sent a copy to the fire marshal and building dept.  Well fed ex
delivered it to the fire marshal first and called the district before
they got their copy.  
The school dist manager said that he emailed every school district in
the area advising them not to use us and is threatening to sue us over
sending a copy to the fire marshal. 


Forest Wilson 
Cherokee Fire 
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 07:56:27 
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Seismic information Brownsville, TX - Monterrey, MX


I am in desperate need of some seismic information for the area around
Monterrey Mexico,

Or someone familiar with the Mexican "Manual for Design of Seismic,
CFE)?

Here's the data I've gotten.  I need to know if it parallels IBC as far
as when EQ bracing is required or if it's totally different and how
these numbers and descriptions relate to IBC?

"5.2.-  Seismic Data: (Per Manual of Design for Seismic, CFE)
Occupancy classification                         B
Structural System classification                 Type 1
Soil Profile Type                                From geotechnical
report
Seismic Zone                                     A
Response Spectra                                 c= 0.16
Ta= 0.30
Tb= 1.50
R= 2/3
Ductility Factor                                 Q= 2"

Thanks!


Craig L. Prahl, CET
Fire Protection Specialist
Mechanical Department
CH2MHILL
Lockwood Greene
1500 International Drive
PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC  29304-0491
Direct - 864.599.4102
Fax - 864.599.8439
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ch2m.com
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 3614 (20081114) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Reply via email to