I'll start by saying I assume all of you know more than I do about this subject.
My second foray into water quality testing is about all the farther I want to go into this subject. Here's what I have learned: 1. This is an owner requirement but owners don't know they have this responsibility. 2. There may be one handful of labs in the country who are able to do the testing. 3. There is no standard protocol for performing the testing. 4. Ed Schultz made 3 attempts to make positive changes to NFPA 13 (ROP 469, 470, 471) but he got 3 rejections for the '10 edition. However, the committee did add two additional owner options just in case some owner out there stumbles onto this requirement. 5. There's no obligation for the engineer, designer, or contractor to be involved in this subject whatsoever. If not notified by "the owner", then all the rest of us who understand the problem and its consequences can say "the owner" did not inform us. 6. It's pretty clear the committee wants to keep it this way. I'm planning to specify a system treatment approach for every job. Right now I'm leaning toward the Potter approach with the portable chemical injection system. What are the pros and cons of this approach? Bill Brooks William N. Brooks, P.E. Brooks Fire Protection Engineering Inc. 372 Wilett Drive Severna Park, MD 21146 410-544-3620 Phone 410-544-3032 FAX 412-400-6528 Cell _______________________________________________ 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)
