Your contemporaries on Wall St have postponed retirement for many of us a shade older, Chris, decreasing or postponing the drain on the system. My grandkids will be paying for mine, along with the stimulus package.
Back on topic, tho- Bill, how about just monitoring the system with the Potter Coupon Jingalopie and schedule the coupon replacement/analysis in the #25 inspection procedures you hopefully are spec'g for the Occupancy Phase (look it up in #3!). glc -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chris Cahill Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 11:13 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: MIC Design Policy In many cases it's cheaper to treat than test. Either way the costs aren't that dissimilar. Testing tells you nothing over the long term. Apparently, the water can test clean one day and the bug shows up the next day. Also some parts of the country are using sched 40 because of early leaking. I suspect the problem may be MIC not just rapid decay. MIC treatment is certainly cheaper than sched 40. If indeed MIC thicker walls don't really buy that much time. Other than a few hundred dollars/system even $500ish for a 1,000 gal system I haven't come up with a down side. I see the future if not the '10 ed. of all systems requiring air relief, PR(elief)V's or expansion tanks, riser mounted ITV's and MIC treatment. I'm sure many of you are hoping to be retired before the '13 ed. but some of us will still be around through the local adoption of at least the '24 or '27 and the NFPA publication of the '30. Of course I'm assuming you boomer's don't bankrupt the system and us X'ers actually have a chance to retire someday. Chris Cahill, P.E. Fire Protection Engineer Sentry Fire Protection, Inc. 763-658-4483 763-658-4921 fax Email: [email protected] Mail: P.O. Box 69 Waverly, MN 55390 Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW Waverly, MN 55390 -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of George Church Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 9:43 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: MIC Design Policy I'd be cautious about assuming every job has MIC and spending (my) money on every job to cure it; perhaps contractually saddle the spkr guy with the testing and specify a couple labs and/or procedure. Make it an allowance if you need to, since most of us aren't going to want to test the water before bid day, heck its hard enough to find out what flow info is available. glc -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:30 AM To: [email protected] Subject: MIC Design Policy 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) _______________________________________________ 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) _______________________________________________ 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)
