I would say as long as it wasn't specified in bid documents for the higher
RA, I would tell him to pound sand.

Jim Johnston, P.E.
Fire Protection Engineer
Inland Fire Protection, Inc
1100 Ahtanum Road
Yakima, WA 98903
Phone 509-248-4471
Fax 509-248-1180
[email protected]


-----Original Message-----
From: Fletcher, Ron [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 3:03 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: PE Peer Review

I would like the take from the PE's on forum on how to deal with a plan
review comment from an unnamed engineering firm (RJA).

"Due to the higher than normal potential for a fire in the occupant
sleeping and common areas, the reduction in fire are (remote area) for
quick response sprinkler in accordance with NFPA #13 Figure 11.2.3.2.3.1
is not a good engineering practice. Please revise the hydraulic
calculation to account for at least the minimum 1500 square foot design
area as specified by NFPA #13."

The hazard is a dormitory at a minimum security prison.

Ron Fletcher
Aero Automatic Sprinkler
Phoenix, AZ
_______________________________________________
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)

Reply via email to